IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO.45316 OF 2013 (GM-EC) BETWEEN Dundaiah, Aged about 52 years, S/o. Madaiah, Fair Price Depot Owner, R/o. Jyothi Gowdanapura, Chamarajnagar Taluk, Chamarajnagar district-571313. ….Petitioner (By Sri. H.C. Shivaramu, Advocate) AND 1. The Deputy Commissioner (Food), Chamarajnagar District, Chamarajnagar-571 313.
2. The Tahsildar, Chamarajnagar Taluk, Chamarajnagar-57 313. …Respondents (By Ms. Niulofer Akbar, Additional Government Advocate for R-1 & R2) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 21.09.2013, passed by the respondent No.1 at Annexure-L and to direct respondent No.1 to cancel ration cards who have not received the commodities from the petitioner’s shop from June, July & August 2013, as pointed out by the petitioner at Annexure-M dated 29.01.2013, in accordance with the communication dated 06.11.2008 issued by the Commissioner for Food and Civil Supplies to the respondent No.1 at Annexure- C1.
This writ petition coming on for Preliminary hearing – B group, this day, the court made the following:-
ORDER This writ petition is directed against the order dated 21.09.2013 (Annexure-L), passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Chamarajnagar, whereby, the 1st respondent has transferred some of the ration cards assigned to the petitioner’s fair price shop to PACCB, Nagavalli.
2. Learned Additional Government Advocate has filed a memo dated 18.02.2019 along with the para-wise remarks/instructions submitted by the Deputy Commissioner. The relevant portion of the same reads as under:
“2. xxxx This petitioner filed a writ petition No. 45316/2013 against that order. The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka granted stay order in the said writ petition on 10th day of October 2013. Therefore, this authority has withdrawn the said order dated 21.09.2013 by another order dated 26.10.2013 by intimating the Tahsildar Chamarajanagara Taluk to give effect the same. Thereafter, there were no communal clashes or any other kind of clashes regarding the distribution of the commodities by this petitioner in his shop.”
3. The memo filed by the learned Additional Government Advocate along with para-wise remarks is placed on record. Indisputably, by virtue of the interim order dated 10.10.2013 passed by this Court, the order impugned has been stayed. On perusal of the contents of parawise remarks of the 1st respondent mentioned supra, it is seen that during the pendency of this writ petition, the 1st respondent passed another order dated 26.10.2013 and thereby withdrew the earlier order dated 21.09.2013, impugned in this writ petition. In view of the subsequent orders passed by the 1st respondent, the prayers sought by the petitioner in this writ petition do no survive for consideration and the writ petition has become infructuous.
In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of as, having become infructuous.
VR.
Sd/- JUDGE.