High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri M Krishna Reddy S/O … vs The Tahsildar Mulbagal Taluk on 28 August, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri M Krishna Reddy S/O … vs The Tahsildar Mulbagal Taluk on 28 August, 2008
Author: N.Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT!' OF KARHATAKA AT RARGALORE

Dated this the 28"' day of August, 2008

BEFORE     Z
TI-IE Hozrnw am. JU3'!'l(}£  1:     ~

Writ Petition No. 2934 of:-.2_Q_8
BETWEEN:

   

Sri M Krishna Raddy

Aged about 49 years

Son of Munivcnkala Rcdt.1y~..V_

Residing at Cheilapalli Viiiagh _  V   A 'A 

Kolar District        ;.=Petitioner

 _ as  Misrtiay, Advocate)

AED;

1 The  " 

V"§'5."1153b";B1Ta]ii}c.. %%%%% 
" ~ Kola)' *DisV1rJzs;_t

2 1" ' --   C.'-omznissioner
  Kolar

   Thefitmmmiaaioner for Food and

" I Lialivflwsupplies
» _  Road
' Baxzgalore

VJ %:3j 4~  The Hon'bh: Minister for Food

and Civil Supplies

Govt. of Karnataka

Vidhana Soudha

Bangalore -- 560 001 x/"



5 Sr: Krishna
Major
Son of Venkatappa

6 311 V. Devamj
Major
S/o Venkataramanappa  .

Both am residing at

Cheliapalli Village 

Mu1abagalTaIuk V  ; _   _ 

Kolar District  ~  1   

(3; 5:1    as - a)

This Writ  hi   225 and 227 of

the Constitm§ion_"z3f" quash the impugned

endorsement riaté:r11'.;?~9--:30fl7', issuecljby the reepomient~2, at

Thiérwrit  for p1t:hmm' ' my heanng' this
day, the C3otj1't__ made'  'following:

 .....  B Q E B

  has chalicngcd in this Writ Petition

  A31-n k«X'ii1'C"   -35 7.9.2007 I816'? 1111' 8 the wquest of the

 ' 'pctifioifier   the authozizativon granted for distribution of

E 2. The petitioner was grantod an authorkmation to

  -Ldistribute essential commodities to than Iatrlon mtiholders at

Chellapam Village. A licence caznc to be issued on 31.12.1937.

g R/



He has been distributing the fbod items fog" the f 

In 1996 the Gmrcmmcnt of Kaxnamka  'w 

called MMS to distribute rice to me  
Petitioner was directed to dis:a~21;ute 3 kga  
student. Petitioner contends in'  'KfE£!>I1S_VOf  in: was
distributing rice to    
submitted a report atating  1%-V"not distrfiuting
the rice to the siuégfiis.  2104370: came
to be issued   1*2mo. He filed his rcpiy.
Hawevcriyifié   suspension by an
order daéi-'-.1   Tim said oniar was

challcngad 21:53? "i*h§  by pxefcning an appeal

 bcfaC$'jyg-...i_;},';r€ third mpondent. The order of

 aside and the matter was remanded to the

3¢::ac:¢2"1.::'¢ii 1we:§~i1)A§ii:§4iV.¥.'i:fV1t with a dam ' n to dispose of the entire

 ' biiattex: .' "V fwo months. Aficr such Iemmd an mticr 08.1116

   on 4.10.2000 cancelling the Eccnce. Petitioner

  an appeal against the said order in Appeal No.

" before the third respondent which came to be

‘4 V dismissed on 9.7.%OI. Aggieved by the same he preferred a

V

nzvision before the Hoxfbk Mixfmter for Food and

in Fcs No.64/2001 which also mm: tyne =

the said orders he pzcfcned a Wzit
W.P.No. 26771/2063. The wag 313:5}: %be %
‘ ‘ afi1mmg- -‘ the ‘ .

Hmaeevcr, in the end this     licence
pcxiod hm also   is only
subject to   a f    on such

51 fa:fm;§§§g;. it is that mpmm taticm
which is mdorsentent. mm’ by

« the lmrncd counsel for the @1165.’

.’ A i – er mmtcmdfi though this Ocsurt pe:umtt’ ed

to consider the mpreatmtation and gut

u “licence, the authmifics i%aIiy rejected his mqsuwt
” thatinflxc mrhierpxnoendingtheomciaexspassed
‘ afitmmi.

5. I do not see any nmxét in the atbmsaid ocmtenfion.

6. Four authmitics ooncurxenfly have ‘

pctiticmcr who has been granted ailth{)M1j’:fl:&’Ei£?I}\’ ” ‘V 4

the students, aficr lifting rice from {he Ahfgé

not distributnd rice to the The. >

is clearly established. 30 the stands
cstabnama. Once the against the
pefitioner standsAV’cstab]i§g1;;f;:;”Aw,_ he made a
representation to distribute, it
cannot be should not have
btben rcpmsentation. The
authoritigs. in mjecting his request

having _1§:ga1ti”to ihcV ‘p16ve£i i:1isoonduct on his part in misuse

Aof’*u*;»~”tVhc school gmn’ g chm nan. ‘Ihemfom, I

“dLo_fi:;:a; «mm: in this petition. Ac:corclmgly’ , it is

Sd/vi
Judge

f as