Disposed

Basappa B Yattinagudda v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Dec 2023WP/102919/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed by a Fair Price Shop petitioner challenging an order assigning his shop to another party due to age. The court disposed of the petition based on an undertaking by the Advocate General.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of based on an undertaking by the Advocate General to proceed with fresh allotments and grant interim permission to the petitioner to continue operations.

Basappa B Yattinagudda Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:14397 WP No. 102919 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 102919 OF 2021 (GM-PDS)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

BASAPPA B. YATTINAGUDDA, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: FAIR PRICE KEROSENE DISTRIBUTOR, R/O. NEAR ARALIKATTI ONI, BUS STAND, AT POST: MANASUR, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD.

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. M.V. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

ROHAN HADIMANI T Digitally signed by ROHAN HADIMANI T

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶12

THE JOINT DIRECTOR, JOINT DIRECTOR OFFICE OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, DHARWAD-01.

¶13

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, D.C. OFFICE, DHARWAD-01.

¶14

THE TAHASILDAR, TAHASILDAR OFFICE, DHARWAD-01.

¶15

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14397 WP No. 102919 of 2021

¶16

THE SENIOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR, FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS, DHARWAD-01.

¶17

VEERARANI KITTUR CHENNAMMA MAHILA CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION, GARAG VILLAGE, TQ: & DIST: DHARWAD.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. PRAVEEN UPPAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R5)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.05.2020 BEARING NO. SUP.3/C.VA.NYA.PA/CR.29/2019-20 VIDE ANNEXURE-G PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2; ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE GRIEVANCE OF THE PETITIONER UNTIL THE LICENSE IS NOT RENEWED.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14397 WP No. 102919 of 2021

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The advocate for the petitioner is absent.

¶25

The petitioner was initially permitted to

¶26

distribute kerosene, thereafter in the year 1999 as one of the fair price shop closed it doors, the petitioner was temporarily granted permission to distribute ration to the cardholders assigned to the fair price shop which got closed. The same continued till the year 2020 when the impugned order was passed. By way of the impugned order, respondent No.2 on the ground that the petitioner has become old and he is not in a position to run the fair price shop has assigned the same in favour of respondent No.6. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

¶27

The case of the petitioner is that, he never

¶28

expressed his inability to operate the fair price shop and the impugned order is passed without hearing the petitioner.

¶29

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14397 WP No. 102919 of 2021

¶30

Learned AGA upon instructions submits that

¶31

there is an interim order in this writ petition because of which, the petitioner is still continuing with the operation of fair price shop. However, he submits that the petitioner was granted permission to run the fair price shop temporarily as another fair price shop got closed and the said right was not conferred on the petitioner after following the normal procedure that is required under law like inviting applications from the interested parties. He further submits that, as the petitioner was only granted permission to run the fair price shop temporarily and that the respondents would take steps to invite applications for running the fair price shop in the manner known to law and till the same is finalized, the petitioner can continue to run the fair price shop as an interim arrangement. He further submits that the petitioner can also participate for allotment of new fair price shop as and when called for. His submission is placed on record.

¶32

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14397 WP No. 102919 of 2021

¶33

The writ petition is disposed off in terms of the

¶34

undertaking given by the learned AGA as recorded in paragraph No.4 (supra).

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

RH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

Basappa B Yattinagudda v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basappa B Yattinagudda v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Giriyappa Mallappa Magi, Vs the State of Karnataka

Ningappa Neelakanthappa Uppal Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Totaba S/O. Appasab Ingle Vs Shri Balu S/O. Khandu Bhojane

Mr. Mukesh Harjivandas Patadia Vs Induslnd Bank Ltd. Ltd.

Mallappa S/O Siddappa Hanchinal Since Deceased by His Lrs Vs Shri Shivaputra S/O Halappa Hanchinal

M/S P.C. Guddad and Sons Vs the Joint Director (Planning)