Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 935 (KAR)

K. NAGARAJ v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

WP/13681/2023 · 2026-02-11

M G S Kamal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8426 WP No. 13681 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 13681 OF 2023 (GM-PDS) BETWEEN: K. NAGARAJ S/O. KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, FAIR PRICE DEPOT NO. 125, R.M.L. NAGARA, SHIMOGA TOWN, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAVARAJ T.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIMOGA DISTRICT, SHIMOGA-577 201. 2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS, SHIMOGA DISTRICT, SHIMOGA-577 201. 3. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLICES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS, SHIMOGA TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, AGA) Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8426 WP No. 13681 of 2023 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.06.2023 PASSED BY THE R-1 IN PROCEEDINGS NO.RPR/RPR/CR-02/2021-22 VIDE ANNX-A TO THE WRIT PETITION. CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE R-1 TO RESTORE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST THE SUSPENSION ORDER OF THE R-2 AND TO DISPOSE OF THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY GIVING FULL OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONER BY ISSUING A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE R-1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Petitioner who was running a Fair Price Shop at Shivamogga town, is before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 12.06.2023 passed by respondent No.1 as per Annexure-A, in and by which, respondent No.1 while dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of respondent No.2, has further ordered for cancellation of authorization and forfeiture of the deposit amount. 2. It appears that upon the inspection conducted by the respondent No.3 certain irregularities were found resulting in respondent No.2 passing the order dated 01.06.2021 as per Annexure-D. Perusal of Annexure-D indicate that petitioner is - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8426 WP No. 13681 of 2023 accused of nine irregularities and contraventions of the order. Pending enquiry regarding the said irregularities/ contraventions, respondent No.2 by order dated 01.06.2021 had suspended the authorization with immediate effect and as an alternate arrangement, directed transfer of all the cards to the nearby Fair Price Shop. Being aggrieved, petitioner preferred an appeal before the respondent No.1 who passed the impugned order. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that respondent No.1 who is the Appellate Authority could not have passed the impugned order, more particularly, cancelling the authorization and forfeiting the deposit, as the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 2016 (for brevity 'Control Order 2016') does not provide such power. He submits that the respondent No.1 has a very restrictive power and jurisdiction, that is, either to confirm the order passed by the respondent No.2 or to reject the same. Beyond that, he should not pass order as noted above. Hence, seeks for allowing of the petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8426 WP No. 13681 of 2023 4. Learned AGA appearing for the respondents does not dispute the fact that respondent No.1 without enquiry has come to the conclusion of petitioner having committed violation/contraventions of the terms and condition mentioned in Annexure-B. She therefore fairly submits that she has no objection to allow the petition. 5. Heard. Perused the records. 6. Relevant to note the Control Order 2016, providing for Appeal and Revision, which reads as follows: "17. Appeal and Revision: Appellate Authority may, on its own motion or on an application made by the aggrieved person, filed by him within 30 days of the date of receipt of an order or decision of the Authorised Authority, take up for the appeal or revision of any enquiry or proceedings of the Authorised Authority exercising or failing to exercise the power under this order, to issue or renew an authorization or suspending or revoking suspension of an authorization or forfeiting the security of the authorized dealer, for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any decision or order passed by the authorized authority and may pass such order thereon as it thinks fit." 7. Perusal of the above indicate that the respondent No.1 is vested with the vast powers including the original powers as vested with the Authorized Authority. Therefore, the contention urged by the petitioner that except affirming or - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8426 WP No. 13681 of 2023 rejecting the order passed by the respondent No.2, respondent No.1 cannot pass any order, cannot be countenanced. 8. Having said that, the respondent No.2/ authority has merely passed an order suspending the authorization pending enquiry with regard to nine irregularity/contraventions allegedly committed by the petitioner. However, as seen the order at Annexure-A passed by the respondent No.1 do not seem to have passed after completion of such enquiry. Allegation made being serious, could not have been accepted on their face without there being conclusion of enquiry. The order passed by the respondent No.1 cannot be sustained to that to the extent of forfeiture and cancellation of authorisation. 9. In view of the above, following; ORDER i. Petition is allowed. ii. The order dated 12.06.2023 passed by the respondent No.1/Appellate Authority to the extent of cancelling the authorization and forfeiting the amount in deposit is set aside. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8426 WP No. 13681 of 2023 iii. The order of the respondent No.1 to the extent of confirming the order of the respondent No.2 shall remain intact. iv. The matter is remitted to the respondent No.2, who shall proceed to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate order within 60 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28