IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NO.5899 OF 2017 (GM-PDS) BETWEEN:
SRI. GADDIGESHA H.S. S/O H. SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT DODDERAHALLI, HATTUR POST, HONNALLI TALUK – 577 217 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SRI.B.M. SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLY AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE COMMISSIONER, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLY AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU – 560002 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, DAVANGERE - 577001 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DILDAR SHIRHALLI, HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 24.01.2014 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-C TO THE WRIT PETITION.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and file memo of appearance in four weeks.
2. The petitioner is assailing the endorsement dated 24.01.2017 impugned at Annexure-C to the petition. The petitioner is seeking transfer of the authorization/licence which had been issued in favour of the father of the petitioner. In view of the death of the father, the petitioner had made an application seeking transfer of the authorization/licence on compassionate grounds, by the representation dated 23.01.2017. The respondent No.3 has issued the endorsement dated 24.01.2017 rejecting the request of the petitioner on the ground that the representation cannot be considered as the age requirement indicated in the regulations had not been complied.
3. The said aspect of the matter need not be adverted in detail inasmuch as this Court in W.P.No.204335/2014 dated 17.11.2014 had taken a decision that such restriction based on age criteria for the purpose of transfer of authorization/licence on compassionate grounds would not be justified. The said order had been relied in W.P.No.49519/2016 dated 26.10.2016. Since in the instant case the similar issue arises, the reason as assigned in the endorsement dated 24.01.2017 would not be justified. Accordingly, the impugned endorsement dated 24.01.2017 (Annexure-C) is quashed and a direction is issued to the respondent No.3 to consider the application of the petitioner seeking transfer of the authorization/licence on compassionate grounds and pass orders in accordance with law within four weeks from date of which the copy of this order is submitted.
4. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
SD/- JUDGE DR/MDS