Karnataka High Court
Sri Narendra Modi vs The Director Of Agricultural Marketing on 25 January, 2019
Author: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION No.3488/2019 (APMC)
Between
Sri Narendra Modi
S/o. Manjilal Modi
aged about 40 years
Proprietor
M/s. Jay Trading Company
No.E6[6], APMC Yard
Sagar Road
Shivamogga-577 204. .. Petitioner
(By Sri B. Prabhudeva, Advocate)
And
1. The Director of Agricultural
Marketing, No.16/11
Rajabhavana Road
Bengaluru - 560 001.
2. The Deputy Director
Department of Agricultural
Marketing, Sagar Road
Shivamogga - 577 204. .. Respondents
(By Smt. B P Radha, AGA)
This writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated
4.1.2019 passed by the R1 a copy of which is produced at
Annexure-G and direct the respondents to permit the
petitioner to carry on the business in the APMC Market
Yard, Shivamogga.
2
This writ petition coming on for orders this day, the
Court passed the following: -
ORDER
The petitioner has challenged the order dated 4.1.2019 passed by the 1st respondent vide Annexure-G to the writ petition.
2. The petitioner on an earlier occasion had approached this Court in WP No.55390/2018, which came to be disposed off by order dated 21.12.2018 directing the Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeal expeditiously and to consider the interim relief at the first instance.
3. The order has been passed pursuant to the direction of this Court by order dated 4.1.2019, whereby the interim prayer has been rejected and the matter has been taken up for final hearing.
4. The petitioner states that the order impugned is not legally tenable and advances contentions on the merits of the matter. However, noticing what has been challenged is only the interim order, it would meet the ends of justice if direction is issued to the respondent to 3 dispose of the appeal itself expeditiously. Entering into the enquiry as regards the validity of the order vide Annexure-G to entail observations and findings, which would prejudice the disposal of the appeal on merit and hence this Court declines to exercise the power vested under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to intervene in this matter at this stage. However, noticing that the appeal is required to be disposed of as already observed earlier in WP No.55390/2018, the Appellate Authority is directed to dispose of the appeal on priority.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that there is stock of food grains that are lying within the shop premises and if he is not permitted to remove the said stock and deal with the said stock appropriately, it would result in destruction of the said food grains. The Authority concerned is to look into the said matter and the petitioner is permitted to make necessary application before the Appellate Authority as regards the stock that has kept in the premises.
6. In the light of the above submission made, the Appellate Authority is also directed to pass appropriate 4 order forthwith to ensure that the food grains that has kept in the shop premises do not deteriorate in quality resulting in loss. The said application to be considered in accordance with law. The main appeal itself is to be disposed of within a period of three weeks from this day.
7. The petitioner would be present before the Appellate Authority on 29.1.2019 and the Appellate Authority to take up the said appeal and then fix dates as may be convenient to ensure expeditious disposal as observed above, within a period of not later than three weeks from today.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of subject to the above observations.
Sd/-
JUDGE Bkm