Shri Shivappa S/O Basavanneppa ... vs Government Of Karnataka
2026 Latest Caselaw 311 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Shri Shivappa S/O Basavanneppa ... vs Government Of Karnataka on 20 January, 2026

                                                        -1-
                                                               NC: 2026:KHC-D:619-DB
                                                              WA No. 100560 of 2025


                           HC-KAR




                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

                            DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

                                                PRESENT

                                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

                                                  AND

                           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI

                               WRIT APPEAL NO. 100560 OF 2025 (GM-PDS)

                          BETWEEN:


                          SHRI SHIVAPPA
                          S/O BASAVANNEPPA KOPPADGANIGER,
                          AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC. OWNER FAIR PRICE SHOP,
                          R/O. 37 S.B. KOPPADGANIGER, GANJIGATTI,
                          TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD-581 204.
                                                                         ... APPELLANT

                          (BY SRI. AKARSH MITTALKOD, ADVOCATE FOR
                              SRI. MITTALKOD SANGAPPA HUCHACHAPPA, ADVOCATE)
          Digitally
          signed by V N
          BADIGER
          Location:
          HIGH COURT
VN
BADIGER
          OF
          KARNATAKA
          DHARWAD
          BENCH
                          AND:
          Date:
          2026.01.22
          16:27:18
          +0530




                          1.    GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
                                REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
                                FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT,
                                VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.

                          2.    DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
                                UB HILLS ROAD, NEAR HINDI PRACHAR SABHA
                                CIRCLE, MALMADDI, DHARWAD,
                                KARNATAKA-580 001.
                           -2-
                                   NC: 2026:KHC-D:619-DB
                                  WA No. 100560 of 2025


HC-KAR




3.   JOINT DIRECTOR,
     FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS,
     DHARWAD-580 001.

4.   TAHASILDAR KALAGHATAGI,
     TQ. KALAGHATAGI,
     DIST. DHARWAD-581 204.
                                         ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R1 AND R4)

      THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS IN W.P. NO.102099/2024 (GM-PDS) ON THE FILE OF
SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT; SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED
BY THE SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P. NO.102099/2024 (GM-PDS)
DATED 28.07.2025 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT
PETITION AN QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 05.02.2024
AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE
APPELLANTS APPLICATION IN THE LIGHT OF ORDER PASSED IN
W.P. NO.148551/2020 (GM-PDS) AND RENEW THE LICENSE FOR
RUNNING FAIR PRICE SHOP LICENSE IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.


      THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:


CORAM:   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
         AND
         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI
                                  -3-
                                             NC: 2026:KHC-D:619-DB
                                            WA No. 100560 of 2025


HC-KAR




                         ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN)

1. The appellant herein preferred W.P. No.102099/2024 on

the ground that the authorities concerned refused to renew his

licence granted to run a fair price shop.

2. The learned Single Judge without examining whether the

appellant was entitled to renewal or not, passed the following

order:

"3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has been distributing food grains for 20 years. The license having expired, the learned AGA submits that given 6 weeks time, a paper publication would be taken inviting applicants for the purpose of distribution of food grains in Ganjigatti, Kalghatagi taluk and the same would answer the grievance of the petitioner inasmuch as the petitioner would take part in the said application process by submitting his application as regard to the advertisement taken out by respondent and if successful the petitioner could be awarded the authorization.

4. Hence, with the above observation the petition stands disposed with a further direction to the respondent to continue to supply the food grains to the petitioner until the above process is completed."

NC: 2026:KHC-D:619-DB

HC-KAR

3. Aggrieved by the order of learned Single Judge, the

present writ appeal is filed.

4. The case of the appellant is that he is entitled to automatic

renewal of the licence to run a fair price shop, more so in the

light of the fact that he has not committed any violations which

would prohibit him from being granted such renewal. It is further

contended that once a licence is granted, unless it is cancelled

for violation of the conditions mentioned therein or under the

rules applicable to fair price shops, he is entitled to automatic

renewal.

5. Per contra, learned AGA, upon instructions, submits that

the appellant is not entitled to automatic renewal and that he is

entitled only to one-time renewal, thereafter the authorities have

liberty to auction the fair price shop, in which the appellant is

also at liberty to participate. It is further submitted that the

appellant is not permitted to distribute food grains under the fair

price shop and that he was granted permission only to supply

kerosene, which is no longer supplied through fair price shops.

The permission to supply food grains, according to the learned

AGA, was only a temporary arrangement. He further submits

NC: 2026:KHC-D:619-DB

HC-KAR

that the appellant has an alternative and efficacious remedy

under Rule 17 of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public

Distribution System) Control Order, 1992 (For short 'the Control

Order, 1992').

6. Rule 17 of the Control Order, 1992 reads as under:

"17. Appeal : (1) Any person aggrieved, by an Order of the Authorized Authority refusing to issue or renew an authorization or canceling or suspending an authorization or forfeiting the security deposited by the authorized dealer under the provisions of this order may appeal to the Appellate Authority within thirty days of receipt by him of such order.

Provided that the Appellate Authority may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days, if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filling it within that period.

(2) No such appeal shall be disposed of unless the aggrieved person has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

(3) Pending the disposal of an appeal, the Appellate Authority may direct that the order under appeal shall not take affect until the appeal is disposed of."

7. The appellant is not in a position to dispute the

aforementioned provision and the fact that he has an alternative

and efficacious remedy.