IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A S BOPANNA WRIT PETITION Nos.38517-38518/2017 (GM-PDS) BETWEEN:
1. K. A NASRUDIEN S/O K.A. MOHAMMED AJHAM AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS NO.23, 3RD MAIN 1ST CROSS, IAPPA TEMPLE BLOCK VANNARPET, BANGALORE-47 2. M/S. SONNENAHALLI CONSUMER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY (REG.) REP. BY ITS SECRETARY SRI. K BABU PRATHAP S/O K.B.S WILLIAMS AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS HAVING REGISTGERED OFFICE AT NO.14, ANDRA LANE, VIVEKNAGAR BANGALORE-01 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI VISHNU HEGDE, ADV.) AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BANGALORE-01 2. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR FOOD AND SUPPLIES CUNNIGHAM ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR EAST FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES (CONSUMER OFFICER) ST. JOHNS ROAD, BANGALORE-560 042 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI A.C. BALARAJ, HCGP.) THESE PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, WITH A PRAYER TO CALL FOR RECORD FROM THE RESPONDENTS AND SET ASIDE IMPUGNED COMMON ORDER DATED 27.07.2017 PASSED BY THE R1 VIDE ANNEX-A.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondents No.1 to 3 and file memo of appearance in four weeks.
2. The petitioners are before this Court assailing the order impugned at Annexure-A. The petitioners, who were similarly placed as that of the petitioners herein, were before this Court at the earlier instance in a batch of petitions in W.P.Nos.10388-476/2017. This Court through the order dated 06.07.2017 remanded the matter to the Appellate Authority. While doing so, this Court had also granted the benefit of the interim order and had further directed consideration of the application for stay within three weeks and also to consider the main proceedings itself within the time frame as indicated therein.
3. Subsequent thereto, respondent No.1 has passed the order dated 27.07.2017 at Annexure-A rejecting the application filed by the petitioners seeking for interim stay. It is in that light, the petitioners are before this Court in these petitions.
4. If that be the position, when at the first instance this Court had granted benefit of the interim order and in that light had directed consideration of the application for stay and also the main matter, the benefit of stay till the main matter is considered was required to be granted by respondent No.1.
5. In that view, without adverting to the other aspects of the matter, the order dated 27.07.2017 is set aside. The interim order granted by this Court is extended till the main matters are disposed of by respondent No.1. Insofar as the disposal of the main matter, the directions issued earlier by this Court shall be kept in view.
In terms of the above, these petitions stand disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE akc/bms