Karnataka High Court
M/S Abhimaani Publications Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2021
Author: P.B.Bajanthri
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BAJANTHRI
WRIT PETITION NO.58496/2016 (GM-TEN)
BETWEEN:
M/S. ABHIMAANI PUBLICATIONS LTD.,
NO.2/4, DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 010
REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR
SRI. T. VENKATESH ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE
SECRETARY TO EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KARNATAKA TEXT BOOK SOCIETY
NO.4, DSERT, BUILDING,
100FEET ROAD, HOSAKEREHALLI,
BANASHANKERI 3RD STAGE
BANGALORE - 560 085
3. THE COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTION, NEW
PUBLIC OFFICE
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
K.R.CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 001
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA)
2
THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED
27.10.2016 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT AT ANNEX-R AND DIRECT
RESPONDENTS TO RELEASE THE WITH HELD AMOUNT TOWARDS
PENALTY AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING PHYSICAL
HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING HEARING (OPTIONAL), THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
In the instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the
following reliefs:
(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ
quashing the order dated 27.10.2016 in
No.A7/KAPA.PUSAM/MU.MA.49/2015-16 issued
by the respondent society produced at
ANNEXURE-R and direct the respondents to
release the withheld amount towards penalty
and liquidated damages.
(ii) Issue any other writ or direction as this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
2. On 23.12.2020, the following order was passed:
State counsel is hereby directed to furnish
copy of the order of the penalty imposed on the
petitioner in respect of delay in supplying text
books pursuant to the contract entered into
between the petitioner and State-Respondents on
the next date of hearing so as to ascertain whether
the petitioner has been heard before the imposition
of penalty and forfeiting of the EMD amount.
Re-list this matter on 06.01.2021 for further
hearing.
3. Learned counsel on instructions from Assistant Director
of Karnataka Text Book Society submitted that petitioner was not
heard before passing the impugned order.
4. On the above aspect, time and again, Courts have held
that before passing any adverse order against a person whose
civil rights are affected, in such circumstances, concerned person
should be heard in the matter. Identical issue was dealt by the
Apex Court in the case of VIPUL BHAI MANSINGH BHAI vs
STATE OF GUJARAT reported in (2017)13 SCC 51, in
Paragraph 37 of the aforesaid judgment, it is held as under:
37. A Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh
High Court in Thimmasamudram Tobacco Co. v.
CCE 1960 SCC OnLine AP 209: AIR 1961 AP. 324,
held that: (SCC OnLine AP para11)
"11... In a case where the flaw in the order
appealed against consists of in the non-observance
of certain procedure or in not giving effect to the
maxim 'audi alteram partem', it is open to the
officer concerned to start the procedure once again
with a view to follow the rules of procedure and the
principles of natural justice." The said principle laid
down by the Andhra Pradesh High Court was
approved by this Court in Supt (Tech I) Central
Excise v. Pratap Rai, (1978) 3 SCC 113, pp. 116-17,
para 6
5. Accordingly, the impugned orders bearing
No.A7/KAPA.PUSAM/MU.MA.49/2015-16 dated 27.10.2016 is
set-aside. Writ Petition stands allowed. Respondents are at
liberty to proceed to pass order in accordance with law after
providing ample opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The
aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of four
months from the date of receipt of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Brn
