Kiran Kumar vs State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 860 Kant

                                                 -1-
                                                           WP No. 23585 of 2022




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                             DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
                                              BEFORE
                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 23585 OF 2022 (GM-PDS)


                      BETWEEN:
                      1.    KIRAN KUMAR
                            AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
                            S/O LATE M. NAGARAJU
                            RESIDENT OF KARTHALU VILLAGE
                            CHUNCHANAKATTE HOBLI
                            KRISHNARAJANAGARA TALUK
                            MANDYA DISTRICT-571 401.
                                                                  ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI. SHIVARAMU H.C., ADVOCATE)


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

                      2.    THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF FOOD
                            AND CIVIL SUPPLIES AND
                            CONSUMER AFFAIRS,
                            MYSORE DISTRICT,
                            MYSORE-570 001.
                                     -2-
                                                   WP No. 23585 of 2022




3.    THE THASILDAR
      K.R. NAGAR TALUK,
      MYSORE DISTRICT,
      MYSORE-570 001.
                                                           ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N. KUMAR, AGA)


        THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO                          QUASH THE
ENDORSEMENT DATED 27.07.2022 ISSUED BY THE R2 IN
NO.JA/NI/MY/KRN/FPS/28/2021.22                AT        ANNEXURE-B;      AND
ETC.,
        THIS    PETITION,        COMING       ON        FOR   PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                                  ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an

endorsement dated 27.07.2022, by which, the application of

the petitioner seeking transfer of authorization on

compassionate grounds comes to be rejected.

2. Heard Sri. Shivaramu H.C., learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner, Sri. N. Kumar, learned AGA

appearing for the respondents and have perused the material

on record.

WP No. 23585 of 2022

3. Learned counsel, Sri. H.C. Shivaramu, appearing for

the petitioner would submit that the endorsement comes about

on the ground that the age of the father was above 65 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

WP No. 23585 of 2022

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 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."

(emphasis supplied)

4. In the light of the fact that the issue in the lis

stands covered to the orders passed by the Co-ordinate Bench

of this Court (supra), which is not disputed by the learned AGA,

I deem it appropriate to pass the following:

ORDER

I. The writ petition is allowed.

WP No. 23585 of 2022

II. The endorsement dated 27.07.2022 stands

quashed.

III. Respondent No.2 is directed to reconsider the

application of the petitioner bearing in mind the

observations made in the course of the order,

within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy

of this order and appropriate orders shall be

passed, only if the same is not allotted to any other

person as on date.

Sd/-

JUDGE

JY