Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Basavaraj S/o Mallappa Devaramani – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 11.08.2025, by which the third respondent grants the licence to run the fair price shop in favour of the fifth respondent.
2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.H.M.Dharigond appearing for the petitioner, learned AGA Sri.T.Hanumareddy for the respondent-State, the learned counsel Sri.Srinand A. Pachhapure for respondent No.5 and the learned counsel Sri.Sadiq N. Goodwala appearing for respondent No.6.
3. Facts in brief germane are as follows:
The petitioner is a disabled person, who has disability to the tune of 50 percent, so is the fifth respondent. The two were participants in a process for allotment of a fair price shop when it was notified on 15.09.2023. Out of the candidates that were chosen, the sixth respondent was selected as the candidate eligible under the said notification and the fair price shop was allotted in favour of the sixth respondent. The fifth respondent challenges the said allotment before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority confirms the allotment in favour of the respondent No.6. This is challenged by the respondent No.5 before this Court in Writ Petition No.106605 of 202
The court upheld the validity of fair price shop allotments made under previous orders, dismissing challenges based on unchallenged rejections of similar applications.
Point of law: Only aggrieved person, who has participated in the process of allotment of fair price shop can file appeal.
The court confirmed that allotment prioritization must adhere to established criteria, emphasizing the necessity to follow judicial directions in administrative decisions regarding fair price shop al....
Subsequent allottees of fair price shops must be heard in appellate proceedings; failure to do so violates their rights and is contrary to established legal principles.
(1) Impleadment of necessary party in suit – If a necessary party is not impleaded, suit itself is liable to be dismissed.(2) Non-disclosure of relevant and material documents with a view to obtain u....
High Court was not justified in sitting in appeal over the decision taken by the statutory authority under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is trite law that the power of judicial review ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
