IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A S BOPANNA WRIT PETITION No.46693/2017 (GM-PDS) BETWEEN:
SRI. R RAJAMUTHU S/O LATE D RAJAGOPAL NAIDU AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO.2, RIGHT SIDE, N.M.C., 1ST CROSS, NEAR BABY ICE FACTORY BHADRAVATHI SHIMOGA DISTRICT [ (BY SRI BASAVARAJ T, ADV.) AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLY CONSUMER AFFAIRS SHIMOGA DISTRICT SHIMOGA-577201 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLY CONSUMER AFFAIRS SHIMOGA DISTRICT SHIMOGA-577201 (BY SRI A C BALARAJ, HCGP.) ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENTS THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, WITH A PRAYER TO DIRECTION TO THE R-1 QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 06.06.2017 VIDE ANNEX-D AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION DATED 01.12.2016 VIDE ANNEX-B AND ANOTHER APPLICATION DATED 16.12.2016 VIDE ANNEX-C INTERMS OF THE ORDER PASSED IN W.P.NO.204335/2014 DATED 17.11.2014 AND ORDER PASSED IN W.P.NO.49519/2016 DATED 26.10.2016 VIDE ANNEX-E AND F FORTHWITH FOR TRANSFER OF AUTHORIZATION ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER.
THIS PETITION 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 and 2 and file memo of appearance in four weeks.
2. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the endorsement dated 06.06.2017 and in that light is seeking consideration of the representations/applications dated 01.12.2016 and 16.12.2016 in terms of the earlier orders passed by this Court.
3. The petitioner contends that his father was granted the licence/authorisation to distribute the food grains and kerosene to the card holders. The said licence had been renewed from time to time and was valid as on 30.08.2016 i.e., when his father expired. The petitioner had made representations/applications dated 01.12.2016 and 16.12.2016 requesting transfer of authorization/ licence to the name of the petitioner on compassionate grounds. Respondent No.1 through the impugned endorsement dated 06.06.2017 has rejected the application in view of the age limit as prescribed under the Regulations for consideration of the application for transfer of authorization on compassionate grounds. The petitioner therefore claiming to be aggrieved is before this Court in this petition.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate, the detailed consideration of the contentions as put forth is not necessary inasmuch as the very issue with regard to prescription of the age limit for the purpose of consideration of an application for transfer of authorization/licence on compassionate grounds had arisen for consideration before this Court in W.P.No.204335/2014. This Court through the order dated 17.11.2014 has held that the same would not be justified and in that light, having quashed the endorsement had directed consideration of the application. Based on the said order, similar consideration has been made by this Court in several petitions including W.P.No.49519/2016 dated 26.10.2016. In that view, a similar consideration is necessary in this petition.
5. Accordingly, the endorsement dated 06.06.2017 is quashed. A direction is issued to respondent No.1 to reconsider the applications/representations filed by the petitioner and consider the request for transfer of authorization on compassionate grounds as expeditiously as possible, but not later than eight weeks from the date on which a copy of this order is furnished.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE hrp/bms