Allowed

Sri K a Lathif v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Sept 2022WP/11233/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an endorsement rejecting the petitioner's trade license renewal due to alleged hygiene violations. Relying on a prior order, the High Court quashed the endorsement and directed the respondent Panchayath to consider the renewal application under the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, within four weeks while noting the liability to pay license fees.

What did the court decide?

Impugned endorsement dated 02.03.2019 is quashed; Respondent 2 directed to consider renewal application within four weeks.

Sri K a Lathif Vs State of Karnataka — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.11233/2019 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI K.A. LATHIF S/O LATE ADAM AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT NO.255/1, 2ND BLOCK NEAR KEB, SONTIKOPPA ULUGULLI, SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 237.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI PRASAD, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI AKHIL S., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ M.S. BUILDING DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001.

¶13

SUNTIKOPAA VILLAGE PANCHAYATH SUNTIKOPPA VILLAGE, SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 253 REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

¶16

(BY SRI SRINIVAS GOWDA R., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE R-2 DATED 02.03.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-A; ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION FORM NO.3 DATED 21.2.2019 MADE BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Petitioner is running a Chicken meat stall at Huluguli

¶21

Village which comes under the jurisdiction of the respondent No.2 and for running the same, the petitioner has obtained trade license for the year 2018-19 by paying requisite license fee.

¶22

The petitioner's license which was to expire on 31.03.2019, submitted an application dated 21.02.2019 in the prescribed Form No.3 with the respondent No.2 for renewal of trade license vide Annexure-D. The respondent No.2 issued an endorsement dated 02.03.2019 stating that the petitioner's

¶23

¶24

licence cannot be renewed as he is running his shop in violation of the trade licence granted to him and he is not maintaining hygiene and creating nuisance to public by disposing the waste into common public sewage. Being aggrieved, this petition is filed.

¶25

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶26

In light of the order passed in W.P. 15593-95/19, it is expedient to dispose of the petition directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's application for renewal in accordance with law.

¶27

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶28

ORDER

¶29

i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶30

ii) Impugned endorsement dated 02.03.2019 issued by the respondent No.2 at Annexure-A is hereby quashed.

¶31

iii) Respondent No.2 to consider the Petitioner's application/Form No.3 dated 21.02.2019 for grant of trade

¶32

¶33

license for carrying on his business in his shop in terms of section 69 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶34

iv) It is made clear that the petitioner is liable to pay license fee as prescribed under the provisions of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 or Rules made there under.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

Sri K a Lathif v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri K a Lathif v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Santosh Kumar Vs the Zonal Joint Commissioner (South)

The Primary Agricultural Credit Co. Operative Society Ltd., Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Syed Hameedulla Hassan Vs Sri Bheemaiah

Sri N Rajendra Vs the Chief Secretary

R Mayanna Vs the State of Karnataka

T M Rajeshwari Pandit Vs State of Karnataka