NIRANJAN PROVISION STORES Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As these petitions can be disposed of on a short ground, they are heard for final disposal.

(2.) In these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:

(3.) The first relief, (prayer) proceeds on wrong assumption of facts. As a matter of fact, pulses, whole and split came to be notified for regulation of trade in them within the market area of respondent-3 by the notification dated 19-2-1987 bearing No. RDC. 129 MMD 84 published in the official gazette dated 5th March, 1987. Thereafter a corrigundum dated 15th December, 1987 bearing No. RDC. 129 MMD. 84 came to be published in the official gazette on 31st December, 1987. A reading of both these notifications together makes it clear that the pulses, whole and split mentioned in the aforesaid notifications came to be notified for the market area of the 3rd Respondent with effect from the date mentioned therein. As such the relief 'a' sought for by the petitioners does not survive.