Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 89775 (KAR)

MARUTHI M R v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/28236/2025 · 2025-10-15

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41032 WP No. 28236 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 28236 OF 2025 (GM-PDS) BETWEEN: MARUTHI M.R AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O M.C. RAJANNA AND LATE SMT. GANGAMMA RESIDENT OF MAVINAKUNTE VILLAGE THYAMAGONDALU HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KESHAVA CHANDRA S.P, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHIVARAMU H.C, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES,, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES BEERASANDRA VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110. Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41032 WP No. 28236 of 2025 3. THE COMMISSIONER FOR FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, 5TH FLOOR, MARKETING FEDERATION BUILDING CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 052. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR SIMILAR WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 06.09.2025 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT AT ANNEXURE - B AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: "1) issue a writ of certiorari or similar writ or order or direction to quash the impugned endorsement dated 06.09.2025 issued by the second respondent in No. dA¤(D).¨ÉA.UÁæ..f. /DRA/CR-14/2-25-26 at Annexure - B; in so far as petitioner concern ii) issue writ of mandamus to the respondent No.2 to transfer authorization in favour of the petitioner forthwith without seeking any permission from the third respondent in terms of the orders dated 06.12.2024 and 07.08.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No. 31745/2024 and W.P.No. 21276/2025 produced at Annexures - C and C1; iii) issue any other appropriate writ or order or direction to the respondents deem fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity." - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41032 WP No. 28236 of 2025 2. The petitioner's mother was issued a licence/authorization under the Essential Commodities Licensing Order, 1986 on 11.11.1992 which is renewed from time to time and is currently valid until 31.12.2025. The petitioner's mother unfortunately expired on 28.06.2025 leaving behind her aged husband and two male children including the petitioner. It is contended that the father and the other brother have no objection for transfer of authorisation in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner had made an application for transfer of the authorization on compassionate ground on 18.08.2025 which came to be rejected on 06.09.2025 on the ground that the petitioner's mother was aged more than 65 years as on the date of her expiring. It is in that view of the matter, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 3. In a catena of matters this Court has categorically held that the age of the deceased authorization holder being more than 65 years would have no role or impact when an application for transfer of the authorization is made. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41032 WP No. 28236 of 2025 What is required to be considered is the age of the person in whose name the authorization is proposed to be transferred. Insofar as that aspect is concerned, the petitioner has not crossed the age of 65 years, as such restrictions would not apply to the petitioner. 4. In the above circumstances, I pass the following - ORDER a. The writ petition is allowed. b. A certiorari is issued and Annexure 'B' is quashed and a mandamus is issued to respondent No.2 to transfer the authorization in favour of the petitioner in terms of the observation made above if all other requirements are met within a period of two weeks from date of receipt of copy of this order. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE YKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13