- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8857 WP No. 3895 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 3895 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. BALAJI FUELS, PROPRIETARY CONCERN, SECTOR 9A, OFFICE NO. 11, PLOT NO. 45, MARITIME HOUSE, SWAMI NARAYANA TEMPLE, GANDHIDHAM, GUJARATH STATE - 370 201, REPRESENTED BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR MR. HARES CHANDWANI, S/O LATE PARASHURAM, RESIDENT OF SECTOR 9-A, OFFICE NO. 11, PLOT NO. 45 MARITIME HOUSE, SWAMI NARAYANA TEMPLE, GANDHIDHAM, GUJARATH SATE - 370 201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA SHENOY M, ADVOCATE) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND RECEIVER, D.K. DISTRICT, MANGALORE - 575 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SESHU V, HCGP) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT, Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8857 WP No. 3895 of 2025 ORDER OR DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23.01.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WHICH IS AT ANNX-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate has filed a memo and furnished a copy of the communication dated 27.02.2025 made by the Deputy Commissioner, Dakshina Kannada District to the petitioner. 2. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that after verification of the information given by the petitioner at the hands of the Directorate General of Shipping, Mumbai, the said authority has informed the Deputy Commissioner that the Directorate has not issued any email dated 26.6.2024 to the petitioner herein, and it was further directed that the suitable action should be taken against the petitioner for furnishing fraudulent documents. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8857 WP No. 3895 of 2025 3. Having regard to the information furnished by the learned Additional Government Advocate, this Court is of the considered opinion that no further directions can be issued in this writ petition since it is now found that the petitioner has furnished fraudulent documents and action will be taken by the Deputy Commissioner against the petitioner. If the petitioner is aggrieved of the communication dated 27.02.2025, it is open for the petitioner to challenge the same in accordance with the law. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv