Karnataka High Court
Vihaan Direct Selling India Private ... vs Union Of India on 25 June, 2025
Author: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:22212
WP No. 30600 of 2024
C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION NO. 30600 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 7603 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
IN WP No. 30600/2024
BETWEEN:
VIHAAN DIRECT SELLING
INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,
(A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY REGISTERED
UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956)
NO. S-203, SECOND FLOOR,
CHICAGO AVENUE, NO. 3712,
CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 052.
Digitally
signed by
VIDYA G R ALSO AT SY. NO. 34,
Location: KAMMASANDRA VILLAGE,
HIGH
COURT OF BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
KARNATAKA
BENGALURU EAST TALUKA,
BENGALURU - 560 049.
REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR,
SRI DILIPRAJ PUKKELA,
SON OF SRI PDT RAO,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K.G. RAGHAVAN, SR. COUNSEL;
SRI. SHREEHARI KUSTA, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:22212
WP No. 30600 of 2024
C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024
HC-KAR
AND:
1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POSTAL SERVICES
DG POSTS, DAK BHAWAN,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
2. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT,
BENGALURU EAST DIVISION,
GOVERNMENT ELECTRIC FACTORY POST,
BENGALURU - 560 026.
3. POSTMASTER GENERAL,
BENGALURU (HQ) REGION,
KARNATAKA CIRCLE, PALACE ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.N, KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION UNDER
ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA QUASHING THE
COMMUNICATION DATED 29.01.2024 BEARING NO.
BGR/BD/NAF/VIHAAN/23-24 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
NO.3 DIRECTING THHE PUTTING ON HOLD THE RENEWAL OF
SPEED POST AGREEMENT, ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE MA AND
ETC.,
IN WP NO. 7603/2024
BETWEEN:
VIHAAN DIRECT SELLING
INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,
(A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY REGISTERED
UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956)
NO. S-203, SECOND FLOOR,
CHICAGO AVENUE, NO. 3712,
CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 052.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:22212
WP No. 30600 of 2024
C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024
HC-KAR
ALSO AT SY. NO. 34,
KAMMASANDRA VILLAGE,
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUKA,
BENGALURU - 560 049.
REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR,
SRI. DILIPRAJ PUKKELA,
SON OF SRI. PDT RAO,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K.G. RAGHAVAN, SR. COUNSEL;
SRI. SHREEHARI KUSTA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS,
DEPARTMENT OF POSTS,
REP. BY SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF POSTS,
POSTAL DIRECTORATE,
DAK BHAVAN, NEW DELHI - 110 001.
2. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF RMS
BENGALURU SORTING DIVISION,
GOVERNMENT ELECTRIC FACTORY POST,
BENGALURU - 560 026.
3. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POSTAL SERVICES
DG POSTS, DAK BHAWAN,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.N. KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:22212
WP No. 30600 of 2024
C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024
HC-KAR
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) DIRECTION TO THE
R2 TO RESUME ALL THE SERVICES OF THE PETITIONER IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW IN ANNEXURE-K DATED 24.12.2023
IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC.,
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner in W.P.No.30600/2024 has sought for the following reliefs:
"a. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing the communication dated 29.01.2024 bearing No.BGR/BD/NAF/VIHAAN/23-24 issued by the Respondent No.3 directing the putting on hold the renewal of Speed Post Agreement, enclosed as Annexure
- M; and b. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing the communication dated 07/02/2024 bearing No. BGR/BD/NAF/VIHAAN/23-24 issued by the Respondent No. 3 directing the putting on hold the renewal of Speed Post Agreement and the availing of -5- NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR services by the Petitioner Company and enclosed as Annexure P; and c. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing the communication bearing No. BD/ADV/BGE/163/VIHAAN DIRECT DLGS DATED AT BENGALURU 560 025 dated 13/02/2024 issued by the Respondent No. 2 directing that the booking of parcels by the Petitioner may be put on hold, enclosed as Annexure Q; and d. Issue a suitable Writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring that the impugned executive actions issued by the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are in contrary to law; and e. And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity including the costs of this petition."
2. W.P.No.7603.2024 is filed seeking for the following relief:
"a. Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to the Respondent No.2 to resume all the services of the Petitioner in -6- NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR accordance with law in Annexure K dated 24.12.2023 in accordance with law; and b. Issue suitable Writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring that the action of the Respondent No. 2 in denying the services to the business of the Petitioner w.e.f.16.02.2024 as contrary to law in Annexure K; and c. And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity including the costs of this petition.
INTERIM PRAYER a. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records of the Respondent No.2 vide which the decision to halt the services to the Petitioner w.e.f.16.02.2024 was taken;
b. Direct the Respondent No.2 to resume all the services that were stopped w.e.f.16.02.2024 to the Petitioner until disposal of this petition;
c. Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may think fit including the cost of this writ petition."
3. The reference to the annexures is made in W.P.No.30600/2024. In effect the petitioner has called in -7- NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR question validity of Annexure-M whereby the renewal of the Agreement has been put on hold in light of certain communication by the Registrar of the Company as regards criminal cases stated to have been filed by the Company in different courts and being investigated.
4. The petitioner has also challenged Annexure-P whereby the Assistant Director, Department of Posts has reiterated the contents of Annexure-M in effect.
5. Petitioner has also challenged Annexure-Q which is a communication of the Senior Superintendent of Post Office on similar grounds as made out in the contention of Annexures - M and P.
6. It is submitted that on behalf of the petitioners that they are also aggrieved by Annexure-F which is a communication by the Senior Superintendent of RMS to the Registrar of Companies regarding certain information that is sought for by the Department. -8-
NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR
7. It is the case made out by the petitioners that there was an agreement entered into between the petitioner and the respondent - Postal Department on 14.11.2023 wherein certain understanding as regards the petitioner and the respondent - Department of Posts was reduced into writing.
8. The petitioners are aggrieved by the communication referred to above which they have sought for setting aside at Annexures - M, P and Q. It is the case made out by the petitioners that the impugned orders / communications by the Postal Department that is sought to be set aside is a on a mistaken notion of criminal activities which the Department apprehends the petitioner is involved in and making of such insinuations, it is submitted would lead to denial of services as per the orders impugned herein as the respondent which is an entity which comes within definition of State cannot resort to. -9-
NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR
9. It is submitted that even before such orders are passed, putting on hold renewal of agreement, there was no notice and the orders passed being stigmatic, principles of natural justice ought to have been adhered to prior to such orders being passed. Various other contentions have been raised including that the criminal complaints filed against the petitioner have all been stayed by the Apex Court.
10. It is submitted that even otherwise under the provisions of the Postal Act and the Rules, unless there is a prohibition, prescribed by law services ought to be made available. Even if that prohibition is made out before an order preventing the petitioner from availing of the services offered to the general public are put on hold on the ground that there is a prohibition under the provision of the Act the petitioner ought to have been heard.
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR
11. Learned counsel Sri M.N.Kumar has filed a memo in W.P.No.7603/2024 and in W.P.No.30600/2024 which reads as follows:
"The respondents respectfully state that, the petitioner may be directed to submit a representation to the respondents expressing its interest/desire to avail speed post advance facility services. If such a representation is submitted by the petitioner, without prejudice to the rights of the respondents, it will be considered within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of such a representation, in accordance with law.
WHEREFORE, the respondents most respectfully pray that this Hon'ble court be pleased to receive this memo and place on record, in the interest of justice."
12. Learned counsel Sri M.N.Kumar would submit that the impugned orders / communications were passed in light of pending proceedings as per relevant rules.
13. It is not in dispute that there are certain cases pending before the Apex Court in which there is an order of stay by the Apex Court as regards the pending FIRs in
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR terms of the orders passed in Crl.P.No.31/2017 dated 27.03.2017.
14. It is further submitted that the Co-ordinate Bench in Crl.P.No.9308/2016 and Crl.P.No.8655/2024 has set aside the action initiated against the petitioners in which there is a finding recorded that there is no criminality attached to the activities of the petitioner. Though learned counsel Sri M.N.Kumar submits that the matter is still pending before the Apex Court as regards certain FIRs, all that could be stated is an emphatic finding regarding involvement of the petitioner in an alleged offence is a stand that is not open to be taken at this stage.
15. Though learned counsel Sri M.N.Kumar appearing for the Government submits that certain proceedings are pending before the Special Court as regards proceedings under Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013. However, it could be stated that at this point of time, such proceedings not having attained finality, any stand by the
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR respondent to the effect that the petitioners are involved in criminal / fraudulent / illegal activities is not open to be taken at this stage.
16. The scheme of the Postal Act makes it clear that the Postal Department is a public utility and it offers services which can be availed by all without discrimination. Even in the absence of the agreement renewal of which has been put on hold the petitioner could avail of the services of the Postal Department except when prohibited. As regards the aspect as to whether the activities of the petitioner are prohibited, there is neither a concluded enquiry nor a conclusive finding by any of the Courts as on date which has reached a finality.
17. Further, even if such an order is to be passed prohibiting the petitioner from availing services in terms of the Act, no such decision can be taken which would have adverse consequences on the petitioner in light of the
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR adverse consequences of the petitioner without hearing the petitioner.
18. In light of the discussion made above, it is not open for the authorities at this stage and as on date to take a stand regarding the involvement of the petitioner either in criminal activities or fraudulent activities.
19. Admittedly, certain proceedings are still pending, proceedings not having taken to the logical end and it is not open for the Department to be presumptive of the conclusion of such proceedings.
20. There is also force in the contention of the petitioners that any insinuation made in writing by the respondent Authorities before conclusion of any proceedings would not only prejudice the petitioner and other proceedings in light of the respondent being a State entity but would have the effect of denting its reputation as well.
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR
21. Accordingly, in light of the discussions made above, the orders at Annexures - M, P and Q are set aside. The respondent - Postal Authority is to reconsider the application for renewal of the agreement as is permissible and continue to offer services by taking appropriate decision in light of the observations made above.
22. In light of the reliefs in W.P.No.30600/2024 and W.P.No.7603/2024 having over-lapping reliefs and interconnected, both writ petitions are disposed off by this common order.
23. Necessary orders to be passed by the Postal Department within the outer limit of two weeks from today as regards the pending applications for review.
24. Needless to state the observations made herein and findings recorded are limited to the disposal of the present writ petition in light of the prayers made.
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC:22212 WP No. 30600 of 2024 C/W WP No. 7603 of 2024 HC-KAR
25. Annexures - M, P and Q are set aside on the ground that they have taken a stand regarding involvement of the petitioner in criminal activities and investigation by various agencies as regards fraudulent activities without definitive material and without following principles of natural justice. No doubt the agreement is a private arrangement between the public utility and the petitioner. Nevertheless, taking note of the statutory functions of the respondent - Department the agreement of renewal is a matter that has to be reconsidered once again in light of the endorsement and the orders at Annexures - M, P and Q being set aside as per the final order.
Sd/-
(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25 CT: BHK