STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. H SADANANDA SHETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) all these writ appeals except w. A. No. 262/1990 arc preferred against the order dated 13-7-1989 passed in w. P. No. 3174/1989 c/w w. P. Nos. 15922, 10413, 10414, 11712, 5862 and 12216/1988; 2036/1989; 8786 and 16676/1988, 444, 742, 1962, 8562, 9386, 10173, 10370, 3439, 9616, 9498, 5904, 10697, 10933, 11235, 10543 and 10862/1989. Writ appeal No. 262/1990 is also connected with the aforesaid writ appeals even though it is preferred against the order dated 22-1-1990 passed in w. P. No. 1324/1990 because it also relates to the same subject-matter. Hence the above appeal is heard along with the other writ appeals.

(2.) in all the above writ petitions, the subject-matter was as to whether the schemee volved by the state government for the purpose of distribution of food grains through fair-price shops was under the Provisions of Section 3(3) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') and the order issued thereunder viz., Karnataka essential commodities licensing Order, 1986 or whether the said scheme was evolved in exercise of the executive power of the state and as such it fell outside the purview of the act and the Karnataka essential commodities licencing Order, 1986.

(3.) the other question involved was as to whether the zilla parishads, constituted, pursuant to the coming into force of the Karnataka zilla parishads, taluk panchayat samithis, mandal panchayats and nyaya panchayats Act, 1983 (karnataka act No. 20/1985) (hereinafter referred to as 'karnataka act No. 20/1985'), have been entrusted with the function of the state government to distribute the fair-price commodities or they have been doing it under any of the right/power conferred on them under the Provisions of Karnataka Act No. 20/1985. One more contention advanced before the learned single judge was that even if it is held that the zilla parishads were entrusted with the function of distribution of fair-price commodities under Karnataka Act No. 20/1985 by the state government, whether it was not permissible for the zilla parishads to delegate the same to its officers and as such the orders passed by the officers of the zilla parishad were illegal.