Smt Bhagyamma vs State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 9000 Kant

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 9000 Kant
Judgement Date : 1 December, 2023

Karnataka High Court

Smt Bhagyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 1 December, 2023

Author: M.Nagaprasanna

Bench: M.Nagaprasanna

                                               -1-
                                                          NC: 2023:KHC:43457
                                                        WP No. 18530 of 2023




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

                                            BEFORE
                          THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
                          WRIT PETITION NO. 18530 OF 2023 (GM-PDS)


                   BETWEEN:

                   SMT. BHAGYAMMA
                   W/O LATE DEVARAJ
                   AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
                   R/AT DODDAYALUVAHALLI
                   INORAHOSAHALLI
                   BANGARPET
                   KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 114.
                                                                 ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. HARSHA KUMAR GOWDA H.R., ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed         REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
by
PADMAVATHI               SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
BK                       DEPARTMENT OF
Location: HIGH           FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                VIKAS SOUDHA
                         DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
                         BENGALURU - 560 001.

                   2.    THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
                         DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES
                         KOLAR DISTRICT
                         KOLAR - 563 129.
                                  -2-
                                              NC: 2023:KHC:43457
                                            WP No. 18530 of 2023




3.   THE THASILDAR
     KOLAR DISTRICT
     KOLAR - 563 129.
                                                   ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.KIRAN KUMAR, HCGP)

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DTD 25.07.2023 ISSUED BY THE
R-2 IN NO. DRA(1)/CR/2023-24 AT ANNX-D AND ETC.,

     THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
                            ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an

endorsement dated 25.07.2023, issued by respondent No.2, by

which, the application of the petitioner seeking transfer of

authorization on compassionate grounds comes to be rejected.

2. Heard Sri. Harsha Kumar Gowda, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Kiran Kumart, learned High

Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and

have perused the material on record.

3. Learned counsel, Sri. Harsha Kumar Gowda,

appearing for the petitioner would submit that the endorsement

comes about on the ground that the age of the husband of the

NC: 2023:KHC:43457

petitioner was 73 years at the time when he died and therefore,

the authorization cannot be transferred. This is held to be

contrary to law by the judgment rendered by a Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court in W.P.No.17048/2021 disposed on

20.09.2021, wherein it has held as follows:

"The subject matter of this Writ Petition is substantially similar to the one in W.P.No.17131/2018 disposed off by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 8.2.2019, copy whereof is at Annexure-F; at para Nos.9 & 10 of the order, said judgment reads as under:

"From close scrutiny of the aforesaid paragraph, it is evident that in W.P.No.22448/2015 which was decided by an order dated 21.09.2016, 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

NC: 2023:KHC:43457

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 03.09.2021 at Annexure-B is quashed; second respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's application without reference to age and qualification.

Time for compliance is two months.

No costs."

In the light of the fact that the issue in the lis stands

covered to the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court (supra), I deem it appropriate to pass the following:

ORDER

I. The writ petition is allowed. II. The endorsement dated 25.07.2023 stands quashed.

III. Respondent No.2 is directed to reconsider the application of the petitioner bearing in mind the observations in the course of the order within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.