NAGAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, assailing the correctness of the orders dated 29th March, 2007, 11th December, 2006 and 27th June, 2005 passed by respondents 1, 2 and 3 vide Annexures-C, B and A respectively, has presented the instant writ petition.

(2.) FACTS in brief are that, petitioner is an authorized dealer for running the fair price depot at Kurukunda Village, Manvi Taluk under the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Essential Commodities (Public Distribution System) Control Order, 1992 (for short 'Control Order, 1992'). When things stood thus, it was found that, petitioner has violated the relevant provision of the Control Order, 1992 by not distributing the foodgrains to the respective card holders. Therefore, third respondent initiated the proceedings in view of violation of the relevant provisions of the Control Order, 1992. Petitioner appeared before the third respondent and submitted his reply wherein he has agreed that, the bag containing 50 Kgs. of rice was issued for the purpose of distribution to the card holders and the same was belonging to the PDS supply bags and also admitted that, the two persons whom he claims to have given 25 Kgs. each as per their entitlements, are not Antyodaya card Holders and they are green card/yellow card holders. Further, petitioner has catergorically admitted that, the bag was Government supply bag. Therefore, the third respondent, being the competent jurisdictional authority, after hearing the petitioner, has recorded the finding that, petitioner is found guilty of diverting the foodgrains from PDS to open market and the statement given by petitioner clearly proves his culpability and hence, the fair price supply licence was cancelled. Accordingly, the said authority, ordered for confiscation of the kerosene unclaimed by the fair price dealer and cancelled the fair price supply licence for diverting the foodgrains to open market, by his order dated 27th June, 2005 bearing No. CSD/2/2005-06/9. Assailing the correctness of the order passed by third respondent, petitioner has filed an appeal before the second respondent in proceedings No. CPF Appeal 62/ 2005-06 and the said appeal had come up for consideration before the Appellate Authority on 11th December, 2006. The Appellate Authority, in turn, after conducting enquiry and after affording opportunity to petitioner through his Counsel and after going through the written submission filed by petitioner by way of arguments carefully, has held that, the order passed by third respondent was just and proper and the said decision is arrived at after conducting thorough enquiry and after affording personal hearing to petitioner. Accordingly, the second respondent has dismissed the appeal filed by petitioner and upheld the order passed by third respondent. Being further aggrieved by the order passed by second respondent, petitioner has filed a revision before the Hon'ble Minister for Food and Civil Supplies. The said revision had come up for consideration before the revisional Court on 29th March, 2007 and the revisional Court, after affording opportunity to petitioner through his Counsel, and after going through the orders passed by respondents 2 and 3 and other material available on file including the grounds urged by petitioner, dismissed the revision filed by petitioner and upheld the orders passed by both authorities vide Annexures-A and B respectively. Being aggrieved by all the three orders passed by all the three authorities, petitioner has presented the instant writ petition seeking appropriate reliefs, as stated supra.

(3.) HAVING regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the writ petition filed by petitioner is liable to be dismissed as devoid of merits. Accordingly, it is dismissed.