IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.32363 OF 2016 (GM-PDS) BETWEEN:
SRI S.V.RANAGANATH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O S.N.VENKATARAMA RAO R/AT SONNAGANAHALLI SADALI SHIDLAGHATTA HOBLI SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT.
… PETITIONER (BY SRI.H.C.SHIVARAMU, ADV.) AND:
1. THE HON’BLE MINISTER FOR FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLIES VIKASA SOUDHA DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU- 560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR FOOD & CIVIL SUPPLIES CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU- 560 052.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (FOOD) CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT CHIKKABALLAPURA.
4. THE TAHASILDAR CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT CHIKKABALLAPURA.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.V.SHIVAREDDY, HCGP) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED: 22.01.2016 PASSED BY R-1 IN HIS ORDER AT ANNEXURE-J AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY R-2 DATED: 11.08.2008 IN APPEAL 123/05-06 AT ANNEXURE-H AND ALSO QUASH THE ORDER DATED: 18.10.2015 PASSED BY R-3 AT ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri. H.C.Shivaramu, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. V.Shivareddy, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondents.
Heard.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 22.01.2016 passed by the first respondent as well as the order dated 11.08.2018 passed in Appeal No.CFS:Appeal:123/05-06 by the Appellate Authority.
3. The facts giving rise to the filing of this writ petition briefly stated are that the petitioner was given authorization to run the Fair Price Shop in the year 1986-1987. On the basis of the oral complaint submitted against the petitioner, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 25.08.2003. The petitioner responded to the aforesaid show cause notice by filing a reply on 20.08.2005. Thereafter, by an order dated 18.10.2005, the third respondent cancelled the authorization of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 17(1) of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992. However, the aforesaid appeal was dismissed in limine without even calling for the records by the Appellate Authority by an order dated 11.08.2008 and the aforesaid order was affirmed by the Revisional Authority by order dated 22.01.2016. In the above said background, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Appellate Authority grossly erred in not entertaining the appeal on merits and in dismissing the same in limine without even calling for the records and without issuing the notice to the other side and the aforesaid aspect of the matter was not appreciated by the Revisional Authority.
5. On the other hand, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents is unable to point out from the records that neither any notice was issued to the other side nor record was called for by the Appellate Authority.
6. I have considered the submissions made on both sides.
7. Admittedly, the Appellate Authority while passing the order dated 11.08.2008 as neither called for the records nor has admitted the appeal and issued notice to the other side. The appeal has been dismissed in limine by the Appellate Authority and the aforesaid order has been affirmed in revision by the Revisional Authority by order dated 22.01.2016.
8. The right to file an appeal is a statutory right and the petitioner has been depriving of his right to be heard as his appeal has been dismissed in limine by the Appellate Authority. The impugned order cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 11.08.2008 and 22.01.2016 are hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal afresh after calling for the records and after affording opportunity of hearing both the parties, a speaking order be passed within four months from the date of certified copy of this order today.
9. Interim order granted by a Bench of this Court shall continue till the appeal preferred by the petitioner is decided by the Appellate Authority.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion to the claim of the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE VMB