IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.7977 OF 2014 (GM-PDS) BETWEEN:
SRI S.M. NANJAPPA S/O. MUDDU VEERAIAH AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS SULEKUPPE VILLAGE THAREDAKUPPE POST KOTHAGERE HOBLI KUNIGAL TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 130. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI K.N. SUNIL, ADV. FOR SRI RAMESH K.R., ADV.) AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMKUR DISTRICT TUMKUR 572 101.
2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES TUMKUR DISTRICT TUMKUR 572 101.
3. THE TAHSILDAR KUNIGAL TALUK KUNIGAL TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 130.
4. S.P. DAYANANDA S/O. LATE S.N. PARAMASHIVAIAH AGED MAJOR R/O. SULEKUPPE VILLAGE KOTHAGERE HOBLI KUNIGAL TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 572 130. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, A.G.A. FOR R1 TO R3; SRI P. SURESH, ADV. FOR R4 (ABSENT)) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD.24.10.2013 VIDE ANNEX-H PASSED BY THE R-1.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri K.N. Sunil for Sri Ramesh K.R., learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Niloufer Akbar, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3 and Sri P. Suresh, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 24.10.2013, by which 28 ration cards have been transferred to another fair price shop.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No.1 has transferred 28 ration cards to another fair price shop for extraneous consideration without assigning any reasons.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the action has been taken in accordance with the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992, as 28 ration cardholders had made a request for transfer of their ration cards to another fair price shop and therefore, acting on the request made by the ration cardholders, the aforesaid ration cards were transferred.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
7. Section 11(3)(a) of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992 reads as under:
“11. Assignment of Ration Card:
(3) The Authorized Authority may, if he considers it necessary, transfer ration cards from one fair price shop to another:-
(a) on the request of ration cardholders”.
Thus, it is evident that the respondent No.1 has authority to transfer the ration cards from one fair price shop to another fair price shop, on the request of the ration cardholders.
8. Admittedly, in the instant case, the ration cards have been transferred on the basis of the request made by the persons, whose ration cards have been transferred. Therefore, the convenience of the aforesaid ration cardholders has been taken into account while transferring their ration cards from one fair price shop to another fair price shop. The petitioner has no legally enforceable right to insist that the aforesaid 28 ration cardholders are entitled to supply of ration from his shop only. In the absence of any legal right, no writ of mandamus can be issued to the respondents. There is no case for quashment of the order dated 24.10.2013 is made out, as the action has been taken by the respondents in accordance with Section 11(3)(a) of the Control Order, 1992.
In the result, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE ST