IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NOs.57323-57326/2016 (GM - EC) BETWEEN:
1. S.C. & S.T VIVIDODDESHA SAHAKARA SANGHA BY ITS SECRETARY SRI.SURESHKUMAR N.P S/O N.PUSHPARAJ AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/O VIJAYAPURA CHIKKAMAGALUR 2. MAHILA HARIJANA GIRIJANA VIVIDODDESHA SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD BY ITS SECRETARY SMT. LAKSHMY W/O N.PUSHPARAJ AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/O VIJAYAPURA EXTENSION CHIKKAMAGALUR BENGALURU – 560 070 3. DHANALAKSHMY STORE ATTACHED TO MAHILA HARIJANA GIRIJANA VIVIDODDESHA SAHAKARA SANGHA LTD GOWRIKALUVE, CHIKKAMAGALUR BY ITS SECRETARY SMT. LAKSHMY W/O N.PUSHPARAJ AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/O VIJAYAPURA CHIKKAMAGALUR 4. SRI. RAMA STORES BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI.N.PUSHPARAJ S/O LATE NATARAJ AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/O VIJAYAPURA CHIKKAMAGALUR (BY SRI.BASAVARAJU H.N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.RAJAGOPAL M.R., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FOOD CIVIL SUPPLIES CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND LEGAL METROLOGY VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU – 560 001 2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES IN KARNATAKA CUNNINGHAM ROAD BANGALORE – 560 001 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT CHIKKAMAGALUR 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT CHIKKAMAGALUR (BY SRI.A.C. BALARAJ, HCGP) ... PETITIONERS ... RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 25.10.2016 PASSED BY R-3 AT ANNEXURE – B AND ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioners are before this Court assailing the order dated 25.10.2016 at Annexure-‘B’ to the petition. The petitioners are also seeking for mandamus directing respondent No.1 to constitute an Appellate Authority in terms of the Karnataka Essential Commodities Public Distribution System(Control) Order, 2016.
2. The petitioners claiming to be aggrieved by the order of suspension passed by the competent authority, has preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority as per Annexure-‘C’ to the petition. Along with the appeal, an application for interim relief had also been filed. Since the appeal and the application had not been taken up for consideration, as the Appellate Authority was not constituted, the petitioner had approached this Court in this petition.
3. Presently, it is stated that the appeal would now be taken up by the Appellate Authority and therefore, consideration of the matter on merits would not be necessary in t his petition.
4. However, until the appeal is considered and disposed of by the Appellate Authority, the benefit of interim order granted by this Court on 8.11.2016 shall enure to the benefit of the petitioners. The appeal on its merits shall however, be considered by the Appellate Authority in accordance with law and all contentions in that regard are left open.
Petitions are accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Psg