IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAI)
DATED THIS THE 21" DAY OF JANUARY 2010
BEFORE
"ms HON'BLB MR. JUSTICE KL. I\/IANJ_{..11xI../,5tft5I;Ȥ 7T{j C C
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE_ARz'-YVTICND K[1.§§kL{SR "
Between:
Baramappa Basappa Madivalar, C _
Age: 40 years, Occ: Business, _ '
R/0 Balehalli, Tq. Hatzgzg
Dist. Haveri.
(by Sri B.V. Si0_ma.par_.}3§tiyécate'}.3--~.. ' ~'
and
I - V. '_ Vya_V"sayaCA 'Sex/a Sé1'r1aka_1ji. Bank .Ltd.,
VSamfi1as;:§g'i, fef. By its Chairman
V' Ya1Iappa..Per;3p§5'a:- .AraleshWar,
"A,g'e':__ 3.8"yé'a:fs, 15'/V'c>"'Se1vekeri,
Tq: }51anga1;'Bist. Haveri.
~ "The Deputy Commissioner,
" :'s.Have;'i, Ijist. Haveri.
C C = 'Tehasildar, Hangai,
Hangal, Dist. Haveri.
gy...
W.A. N0. 643 1/2oo9(:§M*PDs) s
Appellant
4. The Commissioner for
Food & Civil Supplies in Karnataka,
Cunningham Road, Bangalore-52.
(by Sri F.V. Patil, Advocate for R1,
Sri KB. Adhyapak, A.G.A. for R2 to R4)
- Respondeiiis 4
This Writ Appeal is filed under Section, 4 c;r:1~;e l{arniatal{ail*Iigi'1Vr_*i
Court Act praying to set aside the order passediin the _Writv Petition 0'
No. 65738/2009 dated 29.10.2009. "
This appeal coming on for prelina_ii:na.ry'--.hearin'gon day,
Sri K.L. Manjunath. J, delivered fol'lowin'gj_'udgrnent.
1. There is a delayiioif Accordingly an
application in_Mi'sc--...i ii's""filed to condone the delay.
Being satisfiediiwiith by the appellant, delay of 09
days in filing the iappveal.i.s condoned. Accordingly Misc. W. No.
62Si0.7z'99Viis~allowed..._
2. 5_i_I'h'ot_1gh listed for preliminary hearing, by consent
iéyfrall the partiesvtheiifaatter is heard and disposed of on merits.
appellant herein is challenging the legality and correctness
orderiipassed in W.P. No. 65738/2009 dated 29.10.2009. The
er'
aforesaid Writ Petition was filed by respondent no. 1. According to
Writ Petition averrnents the Writ Petitioner being aggrieyfedlilb-yt’
cancellation of licence granted to him, he has filed an
the Commissioner for Food & Civil Supplies iniKarnataka,i.l3angal’ore3
in appeal no. 22/2009 on 14.09.2009 Alongllwith irheappeai:ianlt=»y
application had been filed by him for _iVnteri’m border stay of
the cancellation of the licence the appeal
the Commissioner did not interiim’liiordei’;..”l’lTherefore first
respondent had Single Eudge
after hearing the interim order had not
been granted, the iiiist respondent would become
infructuous granted an of stay and directed 4*”
res.pondent’:p_t’h ti1e….appeal on merits and in accordance with
law.l’–7¥.”hi’s orcle’1’»is’called’-in uestion in thisa eal.
heard’ learned counsel for the parties we do not see
‘ reasons to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single
V the order of learned Single Eudge is an equitable order.
6~*'”‘
As rightly pointed by the learned Single Judge if an interim ordelf had
not been granted by the Commissioner for Food & Civil in
Karnataka, Bangalore, the appeal filed by the first respondent
to become infructuous. So in the interestt’lofijust_ice .SingIe”.
Judge has granted the order. Therefore we do not see,a;ny”nierits.”in
this appeal. However, we direct the Cornirrrissioner-.fo’r & Civil
Supplies, Bangalore to dispose”:p«–of appeal”«.filed the first
respondent within a period of three.:rn’onth.s
5. In View of the oftne. appeal,’ application in Misc. W.
No. 62499/2009 rs sta§r_visldfi’s1n:i$ed as rising become infructuous.
Sci/~
KFEQE
sd/A—
EEEBGE