IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.519 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SMT. YAMINI NANDINI W/O. MURALI MOHAN AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS OWNER, GODOWN NOS. 1, 2 AND 3 IN SY. NO.147, 139 AND 100 BYADARAHALLI VILLAGE THYAMAGONDLU HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT-562 123.
ALSO AT NO.A-301/75, BRIGADE REGENCY 8TH MAIN ROAD RAJATHA BHAVAN MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE-560 055. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. RAVISHANKAR, ADV. FOR SRI. M. SHIVAPRAKASH, ADV.) AND:
1. THE UNION GOVERNMENT MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE WELFARE KRISHI BHAVAN NEW DELHI-110 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING ADVISOR UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DIRECTOR OF MARKETING AND INSPECTION HEAD OFFICE, CGO COMPLEX NO.4, FARIDABAD-121 001.
3. THE NATIONAL BANK FOR AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT KARNATAKA REGIONAL OFFICE NABARD TOWERS, NO.46 KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BANGALORE-560 009 REP. BY ITS MANAGER.
4. THE SENIOR MANAGER AXIS BANK LTD., AGRICULTURAL RETAIL CREDIT CELL YALAHANKA BANGALORE-560 064. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GURURAJ YADRAVI, ADV. FOR R1 ASG SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS AGAINST THE R1 TO R3 TO CONSIDER THE DETAILED REPRESENTATION DATED 22.12.2016 AT ANNEX-H AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER IN CONDONING THE DELAY AND EXTEND BENEFIT OF SUBSIDY TO THE PETITIONER ALREADY GRANTED BY THE UNION GOVERNMENT UNDER A SCHEME “GRAMEEN BHANDAR YOJANA”.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri.K. Ravishankara, learned counsel for Sri.M. Shivaprakasha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri. Gururaj Yadravi, learned counsel for respondent No.1.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 22.12.2016.
3. Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, the leaned counsel for the petitioner submitted that with regard to the claim for extending the benefit of subsidy, the petitioner has submitted a representation to the competent authority and the same may be directed to be considered and decided by the competent authority by a speaking order.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the first respondent submits that suitable action in this regard shall be taken.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the petition is disposed of with a to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner with regard to his claim for extending the benefit of subsidy by a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the claim of the petitioner.
Sd/- JUDGE *alb/-.