- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22754 WP No. 1401 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 1401 OF 2025 (GM-PDS) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. MALLAMMA, W/O LATE SHEKHARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS GUNDASAGARA SAKKARAYAPATTANA HOBLI KADURU TALUK CHICKMAGALUR DIST CHICKMAGALUR - 577175. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGARAJA N NAIDU., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES AND LEGAL METROLOGY DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE - 560001. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT CHICKMAGALUR DIST CHICKMAGALUR - 577175. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. K P YASHODHA., AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DTD. 05.08.2024 ISSUED BY THE Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22754 WP No. 1401 of 2025 R-3 IN HIS NO.AANASA.NYA.BE.ANG.CR.10.2024-25 PRODUCED ANNX-E. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has called in question the validity of the endorsement at Annexure-E, whereby the application of the petitioner for transfer of authorisation subsequent to the death of petitioner's husband came to be rejected on the ground that the petitioner's husband was aged about 77 years and that the petitioner had completed her 5th Class and not further. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the criteria of age based on the Control Orders of 2016, 2017 and 2021 cannot render ineligible the claim for transfer for authorisation insofar as authorisation originally came to be issued under the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992 ("Control Order", for short). Reliance is placed on the order passed by the Coordinate Bench in W.P.No.765/2024 and connected matters dated 31.08.2024. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22754 WP No. 1401 of 2025 3. The endorsement is on two grounds namely:- i) the petitioner's husband was aged about 77 years of age; ii) petitioner did not have educational qualification beyond 5th Standard. 4. Perused the order passed in W.P.No.765/2024 and connected matters dated 31.08.2024 and the relevant paragraphs are extracted here below: "4. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the respondents, along with the learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA) representing the State, argued that the amended Clause 13 of the Control Orders of 2016, 2017, and 2021 explicitly prohibits the transfer of authorization on compassionate grounds if the authorized dealer dies after reaching the age of 65 years or if the transferee does not possess the prescribed qualifications. They relied on the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No. 13559/2020 and connected petitions, which were disposed of on 23.12.2021, to support their position. 8. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in W.P. No. 13559/2022, upheld the validity of the amended proviso to Clause 13, but it was dealing with a challenge related to the renewal of authorization on compassionate grounds. In W.P. No. 55097/2017, disposed of on 11.12.2017, this Court held that the condition regarding - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22754 WP No. 1401 of 2025 the age limit imposed in the amended Clause 13 was not sustainable. The decision in W.P. No. 204335/2014, which was followed in W.P. No. 43249/2017, ruled similarly. Furthermore, in W.P. No. 103408/2023, disposed of on 12.06.2023, this Court reiterated that the restrictions introduced in the Control Orders of 2016, 2017, and 2021 were prospective in nature and could not be applied retrospectively to authorizations granted under the unamended Control Order of 1992. Therefore, these restrictions are only applicable to applicants seeking fresh authorizations and not to existing authorized dealers or their legal heirs." 5. The Coordinate Bench of this court while dealing with the aspect of transfer of endorsement in W.P.No.17131/2018 dated 08.02.2019 has held as under: "8.Admittedly, the application for transfer of endorsement in favour of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner does not fulfill the criteria with regard to the age. Paragraph-5 of the order dated 20.02.2017 in W.P.No.6993/2017 reads as under: "5. Both on the aspect relating to the applicant not requiring to pass the SSLC and the restriction of age not being applicable when the transfer of authorization is sought on compassionate ground has arisen before this Court in several writ petitions including - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22754 WP No. 1401 of 2025 W.P.No.22448/2015 dated 21.09.2016 and W.P.No.204335/2014 dated 17.11.2014 and it has been held that such condition cannot be imposed for transfer on compassionate ground." 6. In light of the above, it is clear that the Coordinate Bench has held that conditions in the amended Clause 13 of the Food Control Order of 2016 onwards being prospective cannot relate in imposing disqualification for transfer of authorisation as authorisation was granted under the Food Control Order of 1992. 7. Accordingly, the endorsement at Annexure-E is set aside. Respondent no.2 to pass orders and grant authorisation if other guidelines are met, within a period of three weeks from today. Further, the second respondent is the competent authority to consider the application and need not transfer the same to other higher up officials and may take a decision as per the procedure. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE NP