Allowed

Rekha M R v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC23 Jul 2024WP/2582/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the issuance of an arbitrary order by Respondent No.3 inviting applications for Fair Price Shops without following due process regarding an eligible petitioner who had been allotted rights in the previous cycle. The court quashed the impugned order and directed Respondent No.3 to allot the card and stock to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 28.1.2021 was quashed and the respondent was directed to allot the card and stock to the petitioner within two months.

Rekha M R Vs the State of Karnataka — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:28792 WP No. 2582 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 2582 OF 2021 (GM-PDS)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

REKHA M R D/O RAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/O VADNAL BANNIHATTI VODDANAHALU POST CHANNAGIRI TALUK CHITRADURGA DIST-577 215.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SMT. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SREEHARSHA A K, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

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

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY THE DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶13

THE COMMISSIONER THE DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU-560 052.

¶14

THE JOINT DIRECTOR DEPARTMETN OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE-577 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, HCGP)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:28792 WP No. 2582 of 2021

¶19

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANENXURE-L DTD.28.1.2021 ISSUED BY THE R-3 BY DECLARING THE SAME IS ILLEGAL ARBITRARY AND ERRONEOUSDIRECT THE R-3 TO ALLOT THE CARD AND STOCK TO THE PETITIONER AS PER ANNEXURE-F DTD.10.6.2019 AT VEDNAL ANNIHALLI AT V.BANNIHALLI VILLAGE CHANNAGIRI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT AND ETC.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR)

¶24

The respondent No.3 invited applications for the grant of new authorizations to run fair price shops at Vednal Bannihalli @ Bannihalli village, Channagiri Taluk, Davangere District. The petitioner, having been found eligible, was allotted the right to run a fair price shop in the said village and was issued Form-B.

¶25

The petitioner’s grievance is that, despite being issued Form-B, respondent No.3, without granting the authorization to run the fair price shop, invited fresh applications for the allotment of the fair price shop. This Court, by order dated March 9, 2021, stayed the notification inviting fresh applications for the allotment of fair price shops, and this stay is still in effect as of today.

¶26

The learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State, upon receiving instructions, submits that the petitioner had not furnished the SSLC marks card, and therefore was not granted authorization.

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:28792 WP No. 2582 of 2021

¶28

The petitioner has annexed a copy of the SSLC marks card as Annexure-E. Respondent No.3 was obligated to call upon the petitioner to furnish the SSLC marks card and, without issuing such a notice, invited fresh applications. This action is not legally sustainable. The petitioner, not having been allotted the right to run the fair price shop, is nonetheless entitled to the authorization to run the fair price shop, having satisfied all the conditions of allotment.

¶29

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶30

ORDER

¶31

i) The petition is allowed.

¶32

ii) The order dated 28.1.2021 vide Annexure-L issued by the respondent No.3 is hereby quashed.

¶33

iii) The respondent No.3 is hereby directed to allot the card and stock to the petitioner as per Annexure-F dated 10.6.2019 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶34

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶35

BKM

Rekha M R v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rekha M R 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

Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank Vs Assistant Commissioner of Police

Smt Raginiyamma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. K Udyashankara Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Yashodamma Vs the Principal Secretary

Sri B Y Srinivas Vs the City Muncipal Council

Dr M S Praveen Hegde Vs State of Karnataka