High Court Karnataka High Court

Grama Mandala Alur vs The Commissioner And Director Of … on 10 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Grama Mandala Alur vs The Commissioner And Director Of … on 10 March, 2008
Author: K.L.Manjunath
:3 was 31-3 fi'fiRT '? Knflfiamaxa AE nnnafizdafizu

DAEED THIS was xofiinax ow Manes; zofiéfv * *

sarong M_' 1"
run HON'BLE Mr. Jusmfcu:3.i.fimfiJfifiA¢fiF,ft 
warm pzrxrxon no;19o4éiafifi7V(a#§hs§HE  

smmwzau: I '   %     I  

Grama Mandala Aifir,

By its Chairman,' T- ,_;5
Hanumantharaya Ad;'  pa,;
Eiradar, £0'yeari,"*1 P z  .  »
R/o Alu:;'Tqi Mfiddfibihal,*f»-W;
Dist: 'B.1'jap'_t {Jf.f._§ ~ L   PETITIONBR

(By idybfifige §#i£§§i§§ya¢imath Aaata.)
Annzi   T A  

1. aha Commiasionér £ Director of
Eecd_&.CivilflSu9§liaa,

-Cunningham Road, Bangalore.

'fit'?hB'DQP"£§"C6&nflsaioner,
V, jfipeji, Bijapur.
'"1DL§t:%§13apur.

 §{ Tfie $afiai1dax,

Mhddebihal, Dist: B1japur.

T4.zThé Food Inspector,

"'=_4umdaah;ha;, D;;t: §;ja9Lr.

Gac: Easiness, R/6 Efinakunti,
Tq: Mmddabihal, Dist: Bijapur... RESPONDENTS

Deputy Comniausioner ,

4-

£.$ri=B..Vee;’=_tp_1:,>;a_,. Alia; £9; B-1 ta 4) ‘

(Advocate Sri.Mahesh wodeyar for E55) . V’

This Writ Petition is ¥£j.1éd~”::ndar~ jtrt:-;’a:§i’22’é.ja

2:72′? 0:’: fI.””ne fionatituticm of India “thlea;
R–2′, Food. ‘

order dated 19.’7.20i3’_7″‘–~._pas§vad . by
comniasionar Vida JLnna:c1i~.:,je”—.1-I and ._thaf.= orgler dated
3.2.2006 passed by R-3 vigi7e._JLn;:axure–_I;§.

This patiticsnff-2.; for order: this
day, the Court made the folloyfinfgf

-u-cuarg-an

, _hati Vgxianted authorization to
run a’ ‘ depot by the Deputy
CC:1lIl!Iil:SZi.’!Ol2!BI£’V,}” it The same was cancelled on

t141§”‘c9np1ain_t’V1o¢§:ged by some 6f the card holders

*r”e.«’er€tg’t’fi’~t’e Direeter 1′ Fan 5

Vi… – -.. ..i-i1 s__1:.>p._1_ieg.I
to diagpoq:-a as the atpeal. within …-+-an 3:-..’.~.:~.t…= fro.-:-.
12.7.20G:€/ ‘5.’h”.fi€aaftai:’-, an par An’:-x’aza–H uu.”””tuu”””
. ‘ ‘
1,4,5, @g–~q~r\rro’\e/L-4r\n/) ‘Q’
19} ‘ “0t’J”i confirmed the order passed by the

Bijapur in canceling the
authorization granted to the petitianar as per

the orders of the Deputy connulaaioner dated

R

u;.——-

.VyV’rhiuf2″i:’nz:Vi:::s;-7 hasvuut-éached this court in WP 9849/200′? (M449 M305

2. Heard the counsel for tli-3

3. in the earlier rour’1’ii\:’t:’E Enfisy
Comnisaioner by v?’t11f._s 10.2005
setting aside the the Deputy
Conndasioner , . i fiomniaaioner ,
Bijapur to” ~the{_ after holding a
datai.’La£1._ month. Deputy
dated e.2.a.2.2ooa has
cancelled! based. on the regort

of the arid which order has been further

. ” the méorrmisaioner =

to the counsel for the petitioner,

as directions issued. by the Conuulasioner

for Mad and Civil Supplies, Deputy Comnisaioner

‘w3.’thout conducting an enquiry as required under

…_;Lew,so1e1y relying on the report of the Tahsildar

has cancelled the authorization granted to it,

. /
(V

.4-

Petitioner further contends that

maharar fa ‘
Therefore, petitioner contends entire
procedure followed the” o.nthoriti’eg~.,,pelow are
illegal and void is further
contended by 4 ‘fréetitioner that
Corunissioneygv any one of the
grounda._.urg’e:d _ has confirmed the
oz-d.er7__’ of 3 Corrmissioner and has
disndsetedfii wherefore, requests the

court” to aqueeh”‘ the ‘order passed by the Deputy

..’eé§ioner and so also the Conmisaioner.

yjedyocate has produced the records. on

perusal of the records, it is clear that enquiry

3’.-_~.z:a; not been conduoted by the Deputy Conlnisaioner

per (31.12 of the Karnataka Essential

he .—¢onmodities (PBS) Control 0rder,1992. Even

Tahsildar has not conducted any enquiry.

n /
‘§”Y

ot , and

fifié ifififififitfii’. FISH” 1; LII-_E:_ ,V:I1llA!’:i

records, it is clear that thaiv otmier p.§La:;éci’ by the’

neputy Connissionex, Bi’j’a;§ur, as. _ Aignékuxe-D’

dated 8.2.2006 whigh 13:5′ arflfinaa by the
Conmtssioner as pézf V..vc”i’.a_.1:ed 19.7.2007

are raquirefldltebe:§téi$he§l}’~:/,t”‘*.._ V”

hetéfiy quashed. flatter in
rarnahE.’.e{1.tdthfifbepfitgflcmnussioner, Bijapur, for

fresh _.in Aacdzsurdance with law.

3,/170309