Karnataka High Court
Sri. P. Guruputra S/O Late P Bheemappa vs The Commissioner on 17 October, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14102
WP No. 107611 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 107611 OF 2025 (GM-PDS)
BETWEEN:
SRI. P. GURUPUTRA S/O. LATE P BHEEMAPPA,
AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. NIL,
R/O. GOUDAR ONI, DASAPUR VILLAGE,
POST. KONCHIGERE TQ. SHIRAGUPPA,
DIST. BALLARI-583120.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. M. S. HARAVI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER,
FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND
CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT,
CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU-506627.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
RAKESH S (FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPT),
HARIHAR
Digitally signed by
RAKESH S HARIHAR
BALLARI. DIST. BALLARI-583101.
Location: High Court of
Karnataka Dharwad Bench
Date: 2025.10.18 12:17:05
+0530
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR.
FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES AND
CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT.
BALLARI DIST. BALLARI-583101.
4. THE TAHASILDAR.
SIRUGUPPA TALUKA. SIRAGUPPA,
DIST. BALLARI-583122.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V.S.KALASURMATH, AGA FOR RESPONDENT/STATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT, ORDER
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14102
WP No. 107611 of 2025
HC-KAR
OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE
ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO.AANAASA-2/AADHA/6/HANCHIKE/2025-
56 DATED 18-09-2025 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AS PER
ANNEXURE-G. ISSUE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO 3 TRANSFER THE
AUTHORIZATION OF FAIR PRICE SHOP OF DASAPUR VILLAGE IN
SIRUGUPPA TALUKA IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER ON
COMPASSIONATE GROUNDS AND ETC
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMNARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the
following prayer:
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the issue in the lis stands answered by plethora of
judgments rendered by this Court and the Coordinate
Bench, two of which are appended to this petition. The
Coordinate Bench in W.P. No.765 of 2024, disposed on 31st
August 2024 has held as under:
"In all these petitions, the petitioners, who are the
sons, spouse, and both married and unmarried
daughters of the deceased dealers, seek the transfer of
authorization to operate fair price shops under the Public
Distribution System (Control Order, 1992) on
compassionate grounds. The deceased dealers had been
granted authorization during their lifetime, and upon their
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14102
HC-KAR
passing, the petitioners submitted applications requesting
the transfer of the said authorization.
2. The petitioners' applications were rejected on
the grounds that married daughters are not entitled to the
transfer of authorization on compassionate grounds, they
did not meet the requisite qualifications, and the age of
the deceased license holders at the time of death
exceeded 65 years.
3. The learned counsels for the petitioners
contended that the original authorization was granted
under the Control Orders of 1986 and 1992, and as per
the provisions of unamended Clause 13, there was no
restriction on the transfer of authorization on
compassionate grounds. The petitioners argued that the
amended Control Orders of 2016, 2017, and 2021 are not
applicable to authorizations granted under the
unamended orders. Furthermore, the petitioners
contended that married daughters are equally entitled to
the transfer of authorization on compassionate grounds,
citing the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P. No. 51361/2019.
4. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the
respondents, along with the learned Additional
Government Advocate (AGA) representing the State,
argued that the amended Clause 13 of the Control Orders
of 2016, 2017, and 2021 explicitly prohibits the transfer
of authorization on compassionate grounds if the
authorized dealer dies after reaching the age of 65 years
or if the transferee does not possess the prescribed
qualifications. They relied on the decision of a Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in W.P. No. 13559/2020 and
connected petitions, which were disposed of on
23.12.2021, to support their position.
5. After carefully considering the arguments put
forth by the learned counsels for the parties, the key
point for deliberation is whether the petitioners are
entitled to the transfer of authorization to run fair price
shops on compassionate grounds.
6. Clause 13 of the unamended Public
Distribution System (Control Order, 1992) dealt with the
prohibition of the transfer of authorization. It states that
no authorized dealer shall assign or transfer their
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14102
HC-KAR
authorization to any other person, nor shall any person
carry on business on behalf of such an authorized
dealer. However, a proviso to Clause 13 allows for the
transfer of authorization in the event of the death of an
authorized dealer, with prior approval of the Government,
to the spouse, son, or unmarried daughter of the
deceased.
7. Subsequent amendments to Clause 13,
made in 2016, 2017, and 2021, introduced restrictions on
the transfer of authorization on compassionate grounds.
The amended provisions prohibit such transfers if the
authorized dealer was over the age of 65 at the time of
death or if the transferee had not completed the 10th
standard and did not apply for the transfer within 90
days of the death.
8. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in W.P.
No. 13559/2022, upheld the validity of the amended
proviso to Clause 13, but it was dealing with a challenge
related to the renewal of authorization on compassionate
grounds. In W.P. No. 55097/2017, disposed of on
11.12.2017, this Court held that the condition regarding
the age limit imposed in the amended Clause 13 was not
sustainable. The decision in W.P. No. 204335/2014, which
was followed in W.P. No. 43249/2017, ruled similarly.
Furthermore, in W.P. No. 103408/2023, disposed of on
12.06.2023, this Court reiterated that the restrictions
introduced in the Control Orders of 2016, 2017, and 2021
were prospective in nature and could not be applied
retrospectively to authorizations granted under the
unamended Control Order of 1992. Therefore, these
restrictions are only applicable to applicants seeking fresh
authorizations and not to existing authorized dealers or
their legal heirs.
9. In W.P. No. 51361/2019, the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court addressed the issue of whether
married daughters are entitled to the transfer of
authorization. In paragraph 3, it was held that the Control
Orders of 2016 and 2021, which provide for the transfer
of authorization to unmarried daughters or widowed
daughters with no source of income, cannot discriminate
against married daughters solely on the basis of their
marital status, provided they have no independent source
of income. Such discrimination violates Articles 14 and
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14102
HC-KAR
15 of the Constitution of India, which guarantee equality
before the law and prohibit discrimination on the grounds
of sex. This view is supported by the decision in
*Bhuvaneshwari*, where the Court held that the
principle of equality extends to matters of compassionate
appointments as well. The Supreme Court also affirmed
this view in S.L.P. (C) No. 20166/2021, disposed of on
17.12.2021.
10. The decision of the Co-ordinate Bench clearly
establishes that there can be no discrimination between
married and unmarried daughters when it comes to the
transfer of authorization on compassionate grounds.
Discriminating against daughters based solely on their
marital status violates the principles of equality
enshrined in Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of
India.
11. In light of the foregoing, it is evident that the
spouse, sons, adopted sons, and both married and
unmarried daughters of deceased authorized dealers, who
have attained the age of 18 years, are entitled to
the transfer of authorization on compassionate
grounds. Denial of such transfers on the grounds of
marriage or other arbitrary criteria is discriminatory and
unsustainable in law. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i. The writ petitions are allowed.
ii. The impugned endorsements dated
17.11.2023, 06.06.2020, 05.03.2022,
23.11.2023, 25.11.2022, 03.11.2023,
28.11.2023, 21.11.2023, 22.12.2023,
19.12.2023, 21.12.2023, 15.12.2023,
06.01.2024, 18.02.2017, 12.02.2024,
01.02.2024, 19.02.2024, 27.02.2023,
18.03.2024, 27.05.2024, 09.07.2024 and
10.06.2024 in W.P. Nos.765/2024,
8370/2020, 7349/2022, 27695/2023,
24641/2022, 25399/2023, 28018/2023,
28312/2023, 688/2024, 729/2024,
766/2024, 961/2024, 2283/2024,
2608/2024, 6251/2024, 6457/2024,
7913/2024, 9669/2024, 10279/2024,
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14102
HC-KAR
15907/2024, 18913/2024 and 19842/2024
issued by the Deputy/Joint Director,
Department of food, civil supplies and
consumer affairs are quashed.
iii. The respondents are hereby directed to
reconsider the applications submitted by the
petitioners afresh keeping in mind the
observations made herein above, subject to
satisfying other requirements of existing
control order.
iv. The said exercise shall be completed within
three months from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this order."
3. In the light of the issue standing covered by the
judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
(supra), on all its fours and on the same reasons, the
subject petition also stands disposed.
4. The petitioner would be entitled for a transfer
only if the licence is not granted to any other person as on
today.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
VNP/CT-ASC
