Sri.Vijay Kumar K S vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 3842 Kant

                              1

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

                         BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

        WRIT PETITION NO.19799 OF 2021 (GM-PDS)

BETWEEN:

SRI.VIJAY KUMAR K S,
S/O LATE SOMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/AT KITTANE VILLAGE,
KATTAYA HOBLI,
HASSAN - 573 212.
                                             ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NAGARAJA N, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
   REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
   FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES AND
   LEGAL METROLOGY DEPARTMENT,
   VIKASA SOUDHA,
   BANGALORE - 560 001.

2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
   FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES,
   HASSAN DISTRICT,
   HASSAN - 573 201.

3. THE TAHASILDAR,
   HASSAN TALUK,
   HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201.
                                       ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR, AGA)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 17.08.2021 ISSUED BY THE
R2 AT ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.,
                               2


     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

                            ORDER

The subject matter of this Writ Petition is squarely

covered by a Co-ordinate Bench decision of this Court in

W.P.No.17131/2018 (GM-PDS) between Smt.Pushpa and The

Principal Secretary to Government of Karnataka & others,

disposed off on 8.2.2019; at para Nos.9 & 10 of the order, said

judgment reads as under:

"9. From close scrutiny of the aforesaid paragraph, it is evident that in W.P.No.22448/2015 which was decided by an order dated 22.09.2016, it has been held that the requirement with regard to having passed SSLC and restriction of age is not applicable when the transfer of authorization is sought on compassionate ground. The aforesaid finding has admittedly attained finality and is binding on the respondents as they have not challenged the same either by filing a review petition or by filing a writ appeal. Therefore this Court finds no reason to take a different view.

10. In the result, the impugned endorsement dated 23.03.2018 is hereby quashed and set aside and a direction is issued to respondent No.1 to take note of the application filed by the petitioner and to consider the same for transfer of the authorization on compassionate ground as expeditiously as possible, but not later than eight weeks from the date on which a copy of this order is furnished."

2. The Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.932-

933/1974 between A.V.VINODA & ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF

KARNATAKA BY ITS COMMISSIONER & SECRETARY

disposed of on 11.12.1974, has held that the Court should

treat like-cases alike and if relief is granted to a litigant,

similar relief cannot be denied to other similarly

circumstanced litigant as well, there being no derogatory

circumstances.

In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is allowed;

impugned endorsement dated 17.8.2021 at Annexure-D is

quashed; second respondent is directed to consider the

petitioner's subject application without reference to age and

qualification.

Time for compliance is eight weeks.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

cbc