Allowed

Sri.K.R.Gangadarappa v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Oct 2023WP/6029/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging an endorsement order denying authorization on compassionate grounds. The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed the Deputy Director to reconsider the application within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Impugned endorsement dated 18.09.2021 quashed and set aside; Respondent No.2 directed to reconsider application within four weeks.

Sri.K.R.Gangadarappa Vs State of Karnataka — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:36272 WP No. 6029 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 6029 OF 2022 (GM-PDS)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI.K.R.GANGADARAPPA, S/O LATE RAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT D. KAREHALLI VILLGE, DEVANURU POST, SAKKARAYAPATNA HOBLI, KADUR RURAL, CHIKKAMANGALURU - 577 548.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. KESHAVA MURTHY M., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT DEPT OF FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES CONSUMER AFFAIRS, AND LEGAL METROLOGY DEPT, M S BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560001.

¶14

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPT OF FOOD CIVIL SUPPLIES CONSUMER AFFAIRS CHIKKAMANGALURU DIST CHIKKAMANGALURU -577548

¶15

¶16

NC: 2023:KHC:36272 WP No. 6029 of 2022

¶17

THE TAHASILDAR, CHIKKAMANGALURU, CHIKKAMANGALURU DIST, CHIKKAMANGALURU - 577548.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. RAJENDRA K.R., AGA)

¶20

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT ORDER DATED:18.09.2021 PASSED BY THE R- 2 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.,

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶24

Learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for all the respondents.

¶25

Learned counsel Sri.Keshava Murthy M, appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue stands covered by several judgments of this Court, including the judgment of the Division Bench. The question as to whether the education qualification and age of the person who held the authorization could be made applicable in the case of the grant or extension of the authorization on compassionate grounds. Learned

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:36272 WP No. 6029 of 2022

¶27

counsel draws the attention of this Court to a decision of a Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Sri. A.S.Manjunatha Vs.

¶28

State of Karnataka and others in W.P.No.8095/2022 dated 22.11.2022 , wherein the age of the father who earlier held the authorization was also 75 years when he died and this Court held, having regard to the several decisions held that the requirement with regard to having passed SSLC and age restriction is not applicable when the transfer of authorization is sought on compassionate grounds. The learned counsel prays for similar relief.

¶29

Having regard to a decision in the case of Smt.Pushpa Vs. The Principal Secretary and Others in W.P.No.17131/2018 (GM-PDS), which was decided on 08.02.2019 wherein such impugned endorsements were set aside and the competent authority was directed to reconsider the application, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned endorsement dated 18.09.2021 at Annexure-D issued by respondent No.2-Deputy Director of Food and Civil Supplies, Chikkamangaluru District, is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2023:KHC:36272 WP No. 6029 of 2022

¶32

Respondent No.2 is hereby directed to reconsider the application of the petitioner and pass necessary orders as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶33

Ordered accordingly.

¶34

Sd/JUDGE

¶35

Sri.K.R.Gangadarappa v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.K.R.Gangadarappa 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Amanath Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs Mohammed Sharfuddin

Sri S Narasimha Bharathi Vs State of Karnataka Department of

Pushkraj Crushing Equipments Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Senior Divisional Engineer

M/S. Highway - 66 Vs the State of Karnataka

Secon Private Limited Vs Executive Engineer

M/S Pup Cafe Vs State of Karnataka