The High Court rejected a writ petition seeking to quash an APMC tender notification. The court held the petitioner, an individual canteen operator, lacked locus standi as he did not meet reserved categories like FPO or SC/ST and the tender process was completed.
The petition was dismissed as being devoid of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 104004 OF 2024 (APMC)
BETWEEN:
SHRI PRASHANT RAVINDRANATH NAYAK AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOTEL BUSINESS, R/O. RABINDRANATH NAYAK, BEHIND VENKATESH TAKIES, GANDHI NAGAR, TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591123.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI SANTOSH B. RAWOOT, ADVOCATE.)
AND:
MANJANNA E
Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
NC: 2024:KHC-D:14890 WP No. 104004 of 2024
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V.S. KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1 & R2; SRI RAJASHEKAR B. HALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R3-R5; SRI RAJASHEKAR B. HALLI AND SMT. SANGEETH V.A., ADVOCATES FOR R4.)
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 OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTIONS BY QUASHING THE TENDER NOTIFICATION BEARING NO. KRU MAA EE/ KRU U MAA SA(RAA)LEELAIP/TENDER-2024/1307/2023-24 PUBLISHED ON 21-02-2024 IN “HOSA DIGANTHA” DAILY NEWSPAPER PUBLISHED BY THE RESPONDENTS NO.4 AND 5 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for respondents No.1 and 2.
published by respondents No.4 and 5 vide Annexure-D so far as the petitioner is concerned.
the entire process of tender allotment was passed on 17.05.2024 in accordance to the tender notification under the terms and conditions issued therein.
Organization) nor does he come within the category of SC or ST as provided under the Rule 17 of the Rules 2022. On these grounds and so also on the vertical reservation as provided under section 17(2) of the Rules, the petitioner does not come in the category to be considered.
respondents. Under the circumstances, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is devoid of merit. Accordingly it is
dismissed.
Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE
MRK CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a petitioner running an individual canteen has locus to challenge a tender notification where property was reserved for FPOs or SC/ST categories under applicable rules.
Whether the petitioner qualifies for reservation benefits in the tender notification under Rule 17 of the APMC allotment rules.
Whether the petition seeking quashment of the tender notification is devoid of merit.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
N/AReferred
3 provisions across 2 enactments
SHRI PRASHANT RAVINDRANATH NAYAK
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT
THE DIRECTOR AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE
THE SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE, MARKET YARD, BELAGAVI
THE SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE, MARKET YARD, RAMDURG
THE ADMINISTRATOR, AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKETING COMMITTEE, MARKET YARD, RAMDURG
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
