High Court Karnataka High Court

India Food Supply vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 August, 2008

Karnataka High Court
India Food Supply vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 August, 2008
Author: D.V.Shylendra Kumar
" ,_ $121 P s RAMESH KUMAR

  RESHWANI

1 WPI0682.08

II THE HIGH 0003'!' 0!' KARHATMEA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS 11% 6"' DAY OF AIIGBBT. 2008 V. 

asmnuz:
um HOIPBLE HR. JUSTICE  

Writ Petition No.10682 otjeoda Q – = h ”
Between: V V ‘_

1 mom FOOD SUPPLY
N.G. 9/ 16, APMC YARD.
YESHWANTHPUR _ .

BANGALORE-22 ‘
REP. BY ITS MANAGWG. P;:EJ2 ‘
sR:. SH£VAKUMA_R N; ‘~

2 RADHA Es’C’Q.,1,_._f_ ~ _;
No.15/22, cm?. MG CGI\é.PL£:1X
APMQ_YARD;”fF£SHW.A?fF¥IF’JR
BANGALORE»2:?’ §
REP. BY.%I1’S:$*,AA?1*NEi2._ — ‘
sR:”P_Ar’«;K.A;: SURA3*-lie’ ” _

3 JAIN ENTERPRISES. ”

Nix 21/22′, 0133*.’ M G-COMPLEX

APMC YARD, ‘YESHWVANPHHJR
‘A _ __ …. H.

, ~ . 3 REP. 3′(_r2*s PARTNER

– sgz”*JEERENr3AR 9 NAHAR

4 K §(UBER!{‘TF’Ai)iNG ca,

-1510.7′ ,* ~1)6.f..i’\l G BLOCK,
APMI; YARD. YESHWANTHPIJR
BANG;%LORE — 22
* : .REP.”BY ITS PARTNER

N014/16, APMC YARD,
YESHWANTHPUR
BANGALORE – 2’2

REP. BY §”I’S PARTNER
SF?! C M SOMASHEKHAR

I 111″»

2 WP10682.08
MIS AND SONS

NO.l0/ I6. N G COMPLEX
APMC YARD, YESHWANTHPUR
BANGALORE — 22

REE’. BY ITS PARTNER

SR1 E S MURALIKRISHNA

BHATARA TRADING 00.,
NO. :31 16, N G COMPLEX _
APMC YARD, YESHWAMHFUR”—
EANGALORE — 22
REP. BY ITS PARTNER

spa K BALAMURUGAN

SR1 BIHARIJI COMMERCIAL CO3,
No.15/30,MGB COMPLEX», ,
APMC YARD, Y’ESHWAPf!’I-I§’L¥R_
BANGALORE A ‘
REP. BY Yrs-..i°A§’g1_$p§E1?g_
sR1ssPU’ri’.ARMai , *

MANGALDEEP ‘-2:; ”

PULSES&F0_0D . ‘
GRA’iNS’-WHOLESA’LERS-___ ”
N0.5f16.*APMC Y.%,R.DV,’ ‘~ ” 2
YEsHwm;_r1*:~1Pu;2_ A – ”
BAN(,’uAL0REV-32.’– V.

REP; BY ITS FA_R’I’NER

SR! RQGRNA SHAFJK ‘

‘iigmfsons, mpusrarms
_;NO;3./ i«.1,”S VGVGOMPLEX

~. APMC ‘1’Aff~2D;:=YESHWANFHP{JR
‘BANGALORE — 22

RF-P. BY ITS PARTNER
SR1 MO}-IAMMED HUSSAIN

V ummzso TRADERS
‘ -:m–.:2.a, s G cozupmx
APMC YARD, YESHWANTHPUR
H BANGALORE – 22
REP. BY rrs zvammzn

SR1 ALMAS

13

14

15

I6

3 WP1068’2.08

I-IIRA TRADERS

NO. 17130, MGB COMPLEX
APMC YARD, YESHWANTHPUR
BANGALORE – 22

REP. BY ITS PARTNER
SR1 MOHAMMED SIDDIQUE
SREE GANESH TRADERS I
NO.MGB«-21/30, M G com’-max
APMC YARD, YESHWANTHPUR
BANGALORE — 22 * _V
REP. 13? yrs PARTNER

sm JAMEEL AHMED

POPULAR TRADERS «.

NO.4/il.SGCOMPLEXy-
APMC YARD, YESHWAN’l’H_P’UR ‘
BANGALORE «~22 ”

REP. BY n§s:=.»u_e1*NER g
sR1TAYUE,VHL§’Ss_suN’.
M/S.AMBER ‘i.’RADERS”5f ..

No, i~=A,._NEAR ‘M, G COMPLEX… ,
AFMC YAIQEE5. Ymnwarerrzwk
BMIGALORE -‘j’:-:2″ ‘ ‘

REP} .B”1″~I’I’S ~PAR’I”N_ER __ ” ~ ,

SR1 Ams imJI’–HA:2RQ1~:–

13HAGYALAKsH’n§1 1501-IA INDUSTRY

3 £10.12 19,” KAVERI QOEUIPLEX
“Am<3 YARD, YESHWANFHPUR

% BANcALor<E~22
R;%.'"'P;"!3Y" ITS PARTNER
~. '-SR! BM£A_G'ARAJ

_1'7

""sm':–E miizsaml mavens

NO.?f_ :4, s G LANE
APMC YARD, YESHWANTHPLIR

n 'T LBANGALORE – 22

V " I§'i§'.?. BY ITS PARTNER

SR1 M N SATHYA PRAKASH

M s MANJUNATH TRADERS
No.3/22, 091°. M G commsx
APMC YARD. vmsuwawmwa
BANCMLORE – 22

T on lease-cum-sale basis by market

idotztzscl petitioners would vehemently

: jjut a note or pass order of the nature at
t dated 23.7.2008; that it has virtually aflected
in going ahead with the utilization of the
.:'_4'$ho£)s and for further ixnpmvement; that the petitioners

"being bonafidc market functionaries furlctionm g within

5 WP10682.08

9…13._12__E_._g %
Writ petition by several persons who
be licensees in the Ag-icmtmfgg ~
Committee, Yeshwanthpur mt

further claim that the .!§e.*:n L’

committees and also .4 are now
aggrieved by the. ;10t§””P’t1f[; Istirfister of the
Govcmmcnt marketing and
sugar on the allotments in

favour <$ftI1e'* ' '

'2. Appgaréfflgivpilt tat' the petitioners, Sri. Bhagwat,

Minister has no competence or

the market yard are entitied to such allotment; that there

. 3/

6 WP10682.G8

was absolutely no ofision fer the Minister to

that the Minister acting in personal _

have passed such orders; that it "Lacks =

bereft of rwsons and is liable to

3. In this regard, learned fox’

would draw attention to’ tee 126 and
126A of the Marketing
{Regulation [for short ‘the
Act’] the in the note under
Minist’.cr cannot act on
behalf o «mat the State Government

always “ehe executive power of the State

the name of the Governor and it

is who can act in his personal mpacity

etc.,A.

« I The “note at Annexure–~A indicates that it is issued by

described as the Minister of Government of

in charge of the Agricultural Marketing and

Sugar. The State Government definitely acts through its

Q”

7 WP10682.08

Ministers and Secretaries. The power of the State

Govermnent is in reality exercised only by the Minister

and to the extent provided under the rules T

Secretaries also. I do not find

exercise of power nor the Mi1Ii_eterV”1a_e’ks “to L.

pass orders on behalf of the

5. There is no occasi<;2:1:1"'::o' oetition at
this stage, '::e<',*t'Vi.ion has been
taken V' put on hold the
further i:§GVovernm.ent wants to
exercise terms of section 126 of the

Act.

6. $’»j’ri’£epetifion_V_is ‘dieinissed.

Sd/-r
Judge