- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1889 WP No. 102882 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 102882 OF 2024 (GM-PDS) BETWEEN: SHRI. VEERESH S/O. AMAR KORE, AGE. 19 YEARS, OCC. NIL, R/O. HOUSE NO. 1032, ANKALI VILLAGE, TQ. CHIKODI, DIST. BELAGAVI- 591213. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVRAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUSMER AFFAIRS, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU- 560001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, NO.8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU- 560001. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, BELAGAVI, TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI- 590001. 4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, BELAGAVI, Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1889 WP No. 102882 of 2024 TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI- 590001. 5. THE TAHASILDAR, CHIKODI, TQ. CHIKODI, DIST. BELAGAVI- 591201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19/02/2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 IN AAPUVI/NYABEAAM/ANUKAMPA/VIVA-366/2023-24 VIDE ANNEXURE - A. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.4 TO RECONSIDER THE APPLICATION DATED 02/12/2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: i) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 19.02.2024 passed by the respondent No.4 in AaPuVi/ NyaBeAam/ Anukampa/ ViVa-366/ 2023-24 vide Annexure-A. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.4 to reconsider the application dated 02.12.2023 filed by the petitioner. iii) Issue any other writ, direction or any other relief as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court to meet the ends of justice and equity. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1889 WP No. 102882 of 2024 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue in the lis stands covered by the judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Amit Suresh Chakre Vs. the State of Karnataka and others1, wherein it is held as under: “The petitioner’s father was granted with the authorization to run fair price shop on 17.03.1998. Petitioner’s father expired on 09.12.2011. As on the date of the death of the father, the petitioner was minor. 2. After attaining the age of majority, the petitioner filed an application dated 04.12.2009 with respondent Nos.4 and 5 for transferring the authorization granted to the petitioner’s father in his favour on compassionate ground. The said application came to be rejected on the ground that the application is not filed within 90 days as specified under Proviso to Clause 6 of the Karnataka Essential commodities (Public distribution System) Control order 2016. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the respondent No.4 has committed an error in rejecting the application for transfer of authorization on the ground that the application is filed beyond 90 days since the technical ground for making application within a period of 90 days should not be made applicable or should be considered with leniency. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on the order dated 04.09.2018 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.105404/2018. 1 W.P. No.101636/2021 DD: 19.04.2021 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1889 WP No. 102882 of 2024 4. Learned AGA appearing for the respondents submits that, the application filed is not within the specified period of 90 days as specified under Proviso to Clause 6 of the Karnataka Essential commodities (Public distribution System) Control order 2016. Hence, the impugned endorsement rejecting the application of the petitioner is perfectly legal and does not call for interference. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials placed before this Court. 6. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.105404/2018 disposed of on 04.12.2018 has held that the prescription of age and minimum educational qualification for persons who seek transfer on compassionate ground cannot be made applicable and directed the authorities to consider their applications without insisting on the minimum educational qualification and the age limit prescribed in the proviso and when that being the case, the technical ground of making representation within a period of 90 days should not be made applicable or should be considered with the leniency. 7. In the light of the above, impugned endorsement dated 13.01.2020 issued by the respondent No.5 at Annexure-K is hereby quashed. The respondent Nos.4 & 5 are directed to reconsider the representation submitted by the petitioner without going into question on delay, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 8. In the light of the observation made above, the writ petition stands disposed of.” 3. Learned AGA need not dispute the position of law as is considered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1889 WP No. 102882 of 2024 quoted supra. In that light, the petition deserves to succeed. 4. For the aforesaid, the following: ORDER (i) The petition is disposed. (ii) The impugned order dated 19.02.2024 passed by respondent No.4 at Annexure-A is hereby quashed. (iii) The respondent No.4 is directed to reconsider the application filed by the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE VNP / CT: ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51