Disposed

Shivalingeshwara Enterprises v. the Commissionerate of Agriculture

Karnataka HC22 Jan 2024WP/1197/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a manufacturer empanelled by the Agriculture Department, filed this writ petition for consideration of a representation regarding pending dues of Rs.2,86,000/-. The Court directed the respondents to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks, reserving the merits of the claim.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent-State to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

Shivalingeshwara Enterprises Vs the Commissionerate… — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:2939 WP No. 1197 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2024 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 1197 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHIVALINGESHWARA ENTERPRISES SAGAR MAIN ROAD, SAGAR ROAD SHIMOGA -577201, A PROPRIETORY CONCERN BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI. MAHANTHESH

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY Ms. ARCHANA NAVI, ADV. FOR SRI. AJITH A. SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE COMMISSIONERATE OF AGRICULTURE NO.1, SESHADRI ROAD, NEAR, K.R. CIRCLE, OPP. SJP COLLEGE, BENGALURU

¶13

KARNATAKA - 560 009 BY ITS COMMISSIONER

¶14

DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE XHGP+C4X, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, SAMPANGI RAMA NAGAR, BENGALURU KARNATAKA 560009

¶15

JOINT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE 20, BSNL COLONY, BELLARY RAILWAY STATION AREA, COWL BAZAAR, BALLARI KARNATAKA - 583 101

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:2939 WP No. 1197 of 2024

¶18

DY. DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE 7CC5+742, MP.PRAKASH NAGAR, SHANKAR LAYOUT, HOSAPETE KARNATAKA - 583203

¶19

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURE OFFICE HUVINAHADAGALI, HARAPANAHALLI ROAD, HUVINAHADAGALI, HUVINAHADAGALI TALUK KARNATAKA - 583219

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. KIRAN KUMAR, HCGP)

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT R1 AND R2 TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION DATED 14/07/2022 AS PER ANNEXURE-B TO THE WP.

¶23

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

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

¶26

"(i) issue a writ of mandamus, directing Respondents 1 and 2 to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 14.07.2022 as per ANNEXURE-B . to the writ petition; and

¶27

(ii) Issue any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:2939 WP No. 1197 of 2024

¶30

Heard the learned counsel Ms.Archana Navi,

¶31

appearing for the petitioner and the learned HCGP Sri.Kiran Kumar, appearing for the respondents.

¶32

The petitioner claims to be a dealer/manufacturer of machinery tools used in agricultural and allied operatives. It is case of the petitioner that it is duly empanelled by the Department of Agriculture, Government of Karnataka. After the empanelment, certain supplies are made by the petitioner to the respondent - Deputy Director of Agriculture at Hosapete. The petitioner is knocking at the doors of this Court that the amount to the tune of Rs.2,86,000/- are the dues pending for the financial year, 2019-20 and the representation submitted on 14.07.2022 has not yet met its consideration.

¶33

4. Learned HCGP would submit that if reasonable time

¶34

is granted, the representation would meet its consideration and appropriate orders would be passed, in accordance with law.

¶35

The submission is placed on record.

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:2939 WP No. 1197 of 2024

¶38

In the light of the said submission, the respondent -

¶39

State shall consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks, from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order.

¶40

It is made clear that this Court has not pronounced

¶41

upon the merit of the claim of the petitioner.

¶42

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition

stands disposed.

Sd/JUDGE

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61

Shivalingeshwara Enterprises v. the Commissionerate of Agriculture

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivalingeshwara Enterprises v. the Commissionerate of Agriculture

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

M/S Rama Hi Power Tech Vs the Authorized Officer City Union Bank Ltd.

Sri Sampath Kumar S Vs the Authorized Officer/ Manager Canara Bank

M/S Adyar Ananda Bhavan Sweets India Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Union of India

M/S Tumkur Grain Merchants Co. Op Bank Ltd. Vs the District Superintendent of Police

Manjunatha G @ Das Vs the State of Karnataka by

Thimmaiah Vs the State of Karnataka