K N ASWATHANARAYANA REDDY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was granted an authorization by the third respondent to run a fair price shop at Kondamari Village, Kasettahalli Post, Nelavanki Hobli, Srinivasapura Taluk, Kolar District by an order at Annexure 'A' dated 28.2.2004. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 filed appeals challenging the said order before the second respondent in CFS Appeal Nos.157/2003 -04 and 19/04 -05. The appellate authority by its order at Annexure 'F' dated 27.3.2006 allowed the appeals and the order at Annexure 'A' was set aside. The third respondent was directed to pass appropriate orders as per the priority under Clause 6 of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992 ('Control Order' for short). The petitioner filed a revision petition challenging the said order in No.FCS 105 ECA 2009 before the first respondent. The first respondent by while confirming the order in so far as rejection of the claim of the petitioner is concerned directed the third respondent to issue authorization in favour of the 4th respondent. The order of the first respondent is dated 21.2.2013 (Annexure 'G') The petitioner has called in question the validity of the said order in this writ petition.

(2.) THE contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner was found to be more suitable compared to respondent Nos.4 and 5. Therefore, the first respondent was not justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for grant of authorization. It is further contended that the first respondent is not justified in directing the third respondent to grant authorization in favour of the 4th respondent. In this connection, he has taken me through Clauses 5 and 6 of the Control Order.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 has sought to justify the impugned order.