Shri.Baburao S/O Atmaram Sakhare vs The Deputy Commissioner on 27 August, 2009

W? §\Eo.64406 of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 27% DAY or AUGUSflf":2€').€}Tfi§'__j:   %
BEFORE u 'T i
THE HON'BLE MR.JUs'r1CE A131}:  d  3
WRIT PETITION No.e.e2;4Q6/2'o0'9 (G?s:ivfi°DS,1.V !i\; V
BETWEEN: i i    i V
Shri Baburao, n I
S / o Atmaram Sakhare, V
Aged about 52 years,    
Occ: Trade 8a"Ag:i»e'u1tt__1reg, -. "

R/0     .
Tq: Chikkcdi,;f')i.st:'Be1gaf7I£I1f1';...--   ...PETITIONER

(By SI;ii.H  Advocate)
AN D   ' i 2 it

1.  DepiityV'Co1rIis.iSio.rIer,
vB'eigaum Disi;riCt_,_A .

i d   ._ 'Belga"uri"I--.§9 1001.

   Chikkodi,

I at Chikkjodi,
"Dist.:__' 'Belgaum. ...RESPONDENTS

   (I33; Srit I2.I<:.IIattI, HCGP)

This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of

it  "the Constitution of India praying to quash the order at



WP N0.64406 of 2009

Annexure~'G' dated 02.07.2009 passed by the
respondent No.2 bearing No.S.U.P/CR/120/09-10.

This petition coming on for preliminary hearingin

'B' Group this day, the Court made the foliowingzt   V
ORDER '"

Shri R.K.Hatti, learned High" _Cour't""Gdi/1eri'1nientv4 0"'
Pleader, accepts notice for respondent'    7-]:
2. The petitioner was'iigi"ven authorisatio§n""to. run * it

fair price shop at Hadnal viiia_ge"in"'the  It is

his claim that he has  food grains

without; any V  Jifhe authorisation is at

Annexureifisé issued U,nd.er the provisions of Karnataka

 Ess_e'n,tiai' Corr1rIio.dities (Public Distribution System)

 CoVntro1--.__Orde'r,.._ 1992, (for short 'the Control Order,

19'9.2*')i. Itiappeiars that in the adjoining village at Kodani

i.V_viHage..authiorisation was not granted to any one. Hence,

A fjth:eiii"petitioner was requested to distribute the food

grains at Kodani village also. it appears that the

:--///
55""



WP No.64406 of 2009

petitioner did not distribute the food grains properly at
Kodani village. Hence, a complaint was lodged 
Deputy Commissioner alleging  '
Deputy Commissioner, pursuant -_to at: ix
Annexure--E dated 5/8.O6.20O;9,V  
distribution of food grains  'bras C' C
an adhoc basis, is vre.c.V1.uireVcl""to_:'-be-»__suspen--ded§ having
regard to Clause   1992.
Pursuant to jtheireof,   has issued an
endorsement in  "  ,.Annexure~G would
indicate   village, the
authorisation  Hadnal village has been

revoltevdpp for "thesarne reasons. Hence, the petitioner is

iii"before  Court Hduestioning AnneXure--G pursuant to

i'*-winch -hpi'-:~._ivauthorisation in respect of Hadnal village is

reVo.ke<7§'§ '  A

C as   Mr. Ashok.R.Kalyanashetty, learned counsel

--  appearing for the petitioner has no grievance in respect



WP No.64406 of 2009

of suspending the adhoc arrangement insofar as Kopdani
village is concerned. He submits that in the A'
suspending the authorisation at Kodani  '
authorisation in respect of Hadnai-ivili-a.ge  ibgxi 

suspended which, according to him, i's_incor'rect._ , " 

4. Sri R.K.Hatti, learniedi Goveirrimient iifgi-"'1eader
supports the impugned.fTord'er.;.j_ of objections
has been filed on beh:aifv»o:f  the same is

taken on re.c.oi#.d.  ~ i

 orderiipassed by the Deputy
Commissiorier as~th*e Tahsiidar at AnneXures--E

82; Ggrespeotixteiy.Apparently, Annexure--G Wouid stem

ihfrorri An'r1eXiL1,re--E. indeed, a perusai of Annexure--E does

it   itiiat the authorisation of Hadnal village was

the"'««._ imatter of any proceedings before him.

 J'Indeed;V----a perusal of the order itself discioses that there

_i  was-misdemeanor in distributing the food grains insofar

  Kodani viiiage is concerned Which, adrnittediy, the

'\



WP No.64406 of 2009

petitioner did not have any authorisation but _was
distributing on an adhoc basis. Indeed, the 
counsel appearing for the petitioner has 
insofar as Kodani village   
proceedings. Indeed, the 2nd 
certainly, could not have  " it
the authorisation inVrepspeet-"oiiifladnaii ifi11a.ge--i§ on the
basis that the Deputjgxziii  No.1
had directed of Annexure--E

does not 'i'i__1dieation__  the authorisation of

I-iadnai    subjeet matter of order at

Annexure--E.%  1 am of the View that the

impugned o1':1er»at AnneXure--G, insofar as suspending

ii'"the"'auf.horisation iofiili-Iadnal village is concerned, cannot

it  the following order is passed:

ORDER

Petition is allowed. Suspension order

insofar as authorisation of Hadnal viilage is

r

WP N064406 of 2009

set aside. The suspension of adhoc
arrangement insofar as Kodani village is

concerned is not disturbed.

Rule is issued and made absplutee’A.f;o’4’t1fie,.’eXte:1t__ ‘_:Tf

indicated above.

Sri R.K.}-Iatti, ieamfid P1e’éidei4, is
permitted to fiie memo of ap;§eaf’a1:écVe bbfcf-.ur weeks.

333;???