Karnataka High Court

S Udaykumar vs Government Of Karnataka on 20 June, 2025

Author: S G Pandit

Bench: S G Pandit

                            -1-
                                      WA No.100661 of 2023



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
          DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

                        PRESENT
           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT
                            AND
          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
         WRIT APPEAL NO.100661 OF 2023 (GM-PDS)

BETWEEN:
S. UDAYKUMAR
C/O. M. VENKATESHULU,
SECRETARY INDIRANAGAR CONSUMERS'
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY,
W.NO.25, R/O. H.NO.95A,
BANNAPPA BHAVI,
REDDY STREET, DIST. BALLARI-583101.
                                                  ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S.PATIL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
    SMT. SUNITHA P.KALASOOR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
     FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND
     CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT,
     BENGALURU,
     REPRESENTED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY.

2.   DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND
     CIVIL SUPPLIES,
     VIKASA SOUDHA BUILDING,
     BENGALURU,
     REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY.

3.   DEPARTMENT OF ESSENTIAL FOOD AND
     CIVIL SUPPLIES,
     CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
     BENGALURU,
     REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER.

4.   DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICE,
     FOOD DEPARTMENT, DIST. BELLARI,
     REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER.
                                              ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V.S. KALASURMATH, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)
                                           -2-
                                                     WA No.100661 of 2023



     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 09.11.2023 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P. NO.101690/2014 IN THE INTEREST
OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

      THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON
17.04.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT
THIS DAY, C.M. POONACHA, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM:         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT
                AND
               THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

                                CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA)

The present intra Court appeal is filed under Section 4 of

the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, calling in question the

order dated 09.11.2023, passed in W.P No.101690/2014,

whereunder, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ

petition.

2. The relevant facts in a nutshell leading to the

present appeal are that the Indiranagar Consumers' Co-

operative Society, Ballari1, was an allottee under the Karnataka

Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control

Order, 19922, whereby, the Secretary of the Society was

authorised to run a fair price depot/shop within its

premises/godown at 25th ward, Indiranagar, Ballari, vide

Hereinafter referred to as the 'Society'

Hereinafter referred to as the 'Control Order'

authorization dated 22.02.1994 and accordingly the Society

was carrying on the activities of distribution of food grains, in

terms of the said authorisation, which was being renewed

periodically from time to time. That during a visit on

06.02.2007 to the fair price shop of the Society by the officials

of the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Food Department,

Ballari, noticing that the shop was closed, a notice was issued

under Clause 4(3) of the Control Order. Consequent to an

enquiry conducted by the 4th respondent/Deputy

Commissioner, vide order dated 12.11.2007, the 4th

respondent/Deputy Commissioner upon recording a finding that

there was an irregularity in the records pertaining to the stocks,

as also unsatisfactory distribution of material and complaints

having been alleged by 22 customers, ordered for revocation of

the said licence. Being aggrieved, the Secretary of the Society,

preferred an appeal under Section 17(1) of the Control Order to

the 3rd respondent/Commissioner. Vide order dated

17.12.2011, the appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner

and the order dated 12.11.2007 passed by the Deputy

Commissioner was affirmed. Being aggrieved, the Secretary of

the Society preferred an revision before the Ministry of

Department of Food and Civil Supplies. Vide order dated

08.11.2013, the said revision was dismissed and the order of

the Deputy Commissioner dated 12.11.2007 was affirmed.

Being aggrieved, the Secretary of the petitioner preferred

W.P.No.101690/2014.

3. Learned Single Judge, noticing that in the enquiry

the authorities have come to a conclusion about the

irregularities of the Society in maintaining proper accounts

regarding stock, sale, bills and unsatisfactory distribution of

material, dismissed the writ petition. Being aggrieved, the

present appeal is filed.

4. Heard submissions of learned Senior Counsel

Sri. Jayakumar S. Patil for learned counsel Smt. Sunitha

P.Kalasoor for the appellant and learned AGA for respondents

No.1 to 4.

5. In the above appeal, learned counsel for the

appellant filed I.A.No.1 under Order XIII Rules 1 and 2 read

with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19083, to

permit the appellant to produce certain documents.

6. It is the vehement contention put forth on behalf of

the appellant that the Society has been distributing food grains

Hereinafter referred to as the 'CPC'

to the cardholders from the year 1999 to 2007 when no

complaint regarding any incident was made. It is further

contended that by virtue of the interim protection granted

during the period of litigation from 2007 till date, the food

grains are being distributed by the society and no complaints

are received regarding the same. It is contended that the

incident complained of occurred due to the Secretary of the

Society, who was aged 70 years suffering from certain medical

ailments and apart from the said incident there has not been

any other shortcoming in the functioning of the Society.

Hence, the learned Senior Counsel seeks for allowing of the writ

appeal and granting of the reliefs sought for.

7. Per contra, learned AGA justifies the orders passed

by the official respondents as well as the learned Single Judge

and contends that the Society having found to have violated

the conditions on which authorization has been granted, the

orders impugned are just and proper and ought not to be

interfered with by this Court in the present appeal.

8. The submissions of both the learned counsels have

been considered and the material on record has been perused.

The question that arise for consideration is:

Whether the order of the learned Single Judge is liable to be interfered with and whether the reliefs sought for in the writ petition are required to be granted?

9. The relevant factual matrix is undisputed inasmuch

as the Society was issued an authorization dated 22.3.1994 in

Form B under Clause 4(3) of the Control Order and was

authorized to open and run a fair price depot in the

place/premises specified in the said authorization, consequent

to which the society has been running the fair price depot. It is

further a matter of record that consequent to the proceedings

initiated under Clause 4(3) of the Control Order, the Deputy

Commissioner, after conducting an enquiry, vide order dated

12.11.2007 cancelled the licence by noticing that the stock

supplied on 31.1.2007 has not been mentioned in the stock

book, that the stock books and bills are not properly

maintained, the shop has not been opened on time, that there

has been unsatisfactory distribution of material and there has

been a complaint by 22 customers. The said order dated

12.11.2007 has been affirmed by the Commissioner vide order

dated 17.12.2011 and by the Minister vide order dated

08.11.2013. The learned Single Judge noticing that the licence

has been cancelled on various grounds as noticed above and

further recording that there is no reason to disbelieve the

same, dismissed the writ petition.

10. It is pertinent to state here that the licence was

granted in favour of the Society vide authorization dated

22.02.1994 and that the Society was running the fair price

depot till the licence was cancelled vide order dated

12.11.2007. Thereafter, during the pendency of the litigation,

by virtue of interim orders granted in the said proceedings by

the authorities as also by this Court, the Society has continued

to run the fair price shop.

11. This Court, vide order dated 10.03.2025 passed in

the above writ appeal directed the 4th respondent -Deputy

Commissioner to get the inspection of the society done through

the Assistant Director of Food and Civil Supplies, Bellary, with

regard to supply of food grains from 2007 onwards till date and

directed the Society to furnish all the relevant documents for

the said purpose and directed filing of a report before this

Court.

12. The Assistant Director of Food and Civil Supplies,

Bellary, vide affidavit dated 02.04.2025 has stated that the

Society did not produce the records from 2007 up to 2017.

However, the records from 2017 were produced and it has been

stated that due to the pendency of the litigation, the Society

was permitted to distribute the food grains without there being

any renewal of licence. The relevant details of the food grains

regarding allotment of food grains lifted and distributed by the

Society, month wise balance sheet as well as statements of the

cardholders recorded on 18.03.2025 as also photographs taken

have been produced along with the said affidavit.

13. The appellant, vide application filed under Order

XIII Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC has sought to place on record the

original records from 2007 available with the Society which

have also been audited. The appellant has also produced a

copy of the communication dated 25.03.2025 addressed by the

Assistant Director to the Deputy Director and the office note

dated 26.3.2025, which discloses that the Society has been

supplying food grains and the relevant records have been

maintained.

14. It is clear and forthcoming from the aforementioned

that although by virtue of the order dated 12.11.2007 the

licence of the Society has been cancelled by recording certain

violations of the terms and conditions of allotment of the fair

price shop, the Society has been continuing to supply the food

grains from 2007 up to date. The question as to whether there

has been any wrong doing by the Society even in the supplies

which have been continued to be made during the pendency of

litigations being a finding of fact, the same ought not to be

recorded for the first time before this Court in the present

appeal.

15. Although the licence of the Society has been

cancelled vide order dated 12.11.2007 due to various reasons

mentioned therein, having regard to the fact that for nearly 20

years thereafter, the Society has been continuing to supply

food grains and running the fair price shop and in view of the

contention of the Society that the irregularities on the basis of

which the licence has been cancelled were due to a Secretary of

the Society being unwell, it is just and proper that the orders

passed by the learned Single Judge as well as the authorities be

set aside and the matter remanded to the Deputy

Commissioner to enable him to conduct an enquiry afresh

under Clause 4(3) of the Control Order with regard to the

supplies made by the Society upto date after giving an

opportunity to the appellant/Society to put forth its case and

pass necessary orders in accordance with law.

- 10 -

16. In view of the aforementioned, the question framed

for consideration is answered partly in the affirmative.

17. Hence, the following:

ORDER

i. The above appeal is allowed;

ii. The order dated 09.11.2023 passed in

W.P.No.101690/2014 is set aside;

iii. W.P.No.101690/2014 is partly allowed and the

orders passed by the Minister dated 08.11.2013,

the Commissioner dated 17.12.2011 and the

Deputy Commissioner dated 12.11.2007 are set

aside;

iv. The appellant/Society shall appear before the 4th

respondent-Deputy Commissioner on 30.07.2025

without requiring any further notice being issued in

this regard. The 4th respondent-Deputy

Commissioner shall conduct an enquiry regarding

the supply of food grains by the appellant/Society in

compliance of the terms and conditions of the

authorization dated 22.02.1994 from the date of the

first show cause notice which was subject of the