SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 441268

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.NAGAPRASANNA
VITTHAL MARIYAPPA ALIAS MAIYAPPA MALAGALI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 105846/2023



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

WRIT PETITION NO. 105846 OF 2023 (GM-PDS)

BETWEEN:

VITTHAL MARIYAPPA @ MAIYAPPA MALAGALI

AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. FAIR PRICE SHOP NO.87,

R/O. MABANUR VILLAGE,

TQ. SAUDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SADIQ N. GOODWALA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPART,

VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU-01.

2. THE COMMISSIONER

FOOD CIVIL AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPT.

CUNNINGHAM ROAD,

VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU-560001.

RAKESH S 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI,

HARIHAR

DIST. BELAGAVI-590001.

DR LKD+ oa Ai a0 g crt5 Ki ena t 3 E : ta a 0 i S 2t l oa H 0 y nk 2 : s a S 5 H i g D. H 1 i n gh2 Ae ha. dR 1 rC w2 IbH o y a1 u A d4 r R

t :B3 oe4 fn:1c6h 4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR

FOOD AND CIVIL AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPT.

BELAGAVI, DIST. BELAGAVI-590001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227

OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A WRIT IN A NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED NOTIFICATION DATED. 29.08.2023 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 IN NO.

APUVI/NAYABAAM/VINIDHI-80/2023-24 VIDE ANNEXURE-D.

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

“i) A writ in a nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned notification dated 29.08.2023 passed by Respondent No.4 in NO.APUVI/ NAYABAAM/

VINIDHI-80/ 2023-24 VIDE Annexure-D.

ii) Issue such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case.”

in card holders and this has compelled the authorities to issue notification vide Annexure-D.

If authorization granted to open a new fair shop is already seized before the appellate authority, I am of the view that fresh impugned notification vide Annexure-D requires consideration at the hands of this Court.

Therefore, pending consideration of this petition, the impugned notification dated 29.8.2023 issued by respondent No.4 vide Annexure-D is stayed till next date of hearing.

Learned HCGP is directed to accept notice for respondents and file appropriate application for vacating stay after seeking necessary instructions.”

3. Later another Co-ordinate Bench in identical circumstances has passed the following order in W.P. No.202758 of 2022, disposed on 14th August 2024:

1. Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

i. Declare that Notification No.AHARA/

FPS.5.CR 173/ 2021-22 dated 29.09.2022 issued by the 3rd respondent under Karnataka Essential Commodities Act PDS (Control) Order, 2016 is arbitrary, violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India and hence, ultravires the Constitution of India.

ii. Issue a writ of certiorari or other such appropriate writ or orders or directions quashing the notification

29.09.2022 at Annexure-B.

iii. Pass any appropriate writ order or direction as this Hon’ble court deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and allow these writ petition in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The petitioner is the owner of a fair price shop having been granted a licence in the year 1998 to run such a shop in Mahatma Gandhi Grama Hitha Mandali. The petitioner claims that without the petitioner being issued any notice, the respondent No.3 has issued a Notification calling for new fair price depot in the same village vide Annexure-B and if the same were to proceed with, then the number of cardholders attached to the fair price shop of the petitioner would get reduced, thereby affecting the business of the petitioner. It is in that background that the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in terms of Rule 11 of the Karnataka Essential Commodities Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Control Order, 2016’), unles

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top