Full Judgment Text
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:16520
WP No. 9197 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 24 DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 9197 OF 2026 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SATHIS P. J.,
S/O LATE JAGADISH,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/O YEDEHALLI POST,
BHADRAVATHI TALUK,
SHIVAMOGA DISTRICT – 577 227
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. B. M. SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL
SUPPLY AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS,
M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECETARY.
2. THE COMMISSIONER,
THE DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES
CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
BANGALORE – 560 052.
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND
CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT,
SHIVAMOGA DISTIRCT,
SHIVAMOGA – 577 227
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA FOR R1 TO R3)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF
COSNTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION, IN
Digitally
signed by
CHANDANA
B M
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:16520
WP No. 9197 of 2026
HC-KAR
THE NATURE OF WRIT, QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT NO.
SA.AANAS.3. C.R .65/25-26 DATED 18/02/2026 ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO.3 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-C TO THE WRIT
PETITION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
In this petitioner, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:-
“a) Issue writ of certiorari or any other writ or order or
direction, in the nature of writ, quashing the
endorsement No.SA.AANAS:3:C.R.65/25-26 Dated
18.02.2026 issued by the Respondent No.3 produced
as Annexure-C to the writ petition.
b) Cost and such other reliefs deems fit to grant under
the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice
and equity.”
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions
urged in the petition and referring to the material on record,
learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the
judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Sri. Tousif Khan Vs. The State of Karnataka and Ors. -
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:16520
WP No. 9197 of 2026
HC-KAR
W.P.No.765/2024 and connected matters dated 31.08.2024,
in order to contend that the issue in controversy involved in the
present petition is directly and squarely covered by the said
judgment and consequently, the present petition also deserves to
be disposed of in terms of the said judgment.
4. The aforesaid submission is placed on record.
5. In the case of Tousif Khan (supra), co-ordinate Bench
of this Court held as under:
In all these petitions, the petitioners, who are the
sons, spouse, and both married and unmarried daughters
of the deceased dealers, seek the transfer of
authorization to operate fair price shops under the
Public Distribution System (Control Order, 1992) on
compassionate grounds. The deceased dealers had been
granted authorization during their lifetime, and upon their
passing, the petitioners submitted applications requesting
the transfer of the said authorization.
2. The petitioners' applications were rejected
on the grounds that married daughters are not entitled to
the transfer of authorization on compassionate grounds,
they did not meet the requisite qualifications, and the age
of the deceased license holders at the time of death
exceeded 65 years.
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:16520
WP No. 9197 of 2026
HC-KAR
3. The learned counsels for the petitioners
contended that the original authorization was granted
under the Control Orders of 1986 and 1992, and as per
the provisions of unamended Clause 13, there was no
restriction on the transfer of authorization on
compassionate grounds. The petitioners argued that the
amended Control Orders of 2016, 2017, and 2021 are not
applicable to authorizations granted under the
unamended orders. Furthermore, the petitioners
contended that married daughters are equally entitled to
the transfer of authorization on compassionate grounds,
citing the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P. No. 51361/2019.
4. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the
respondents, along with the learned Additional
Government Advocate (AGA) representing the State,
argued that the amended Clause 13 of the Control Orders
of 2016, 2017, and 2021 explicitly prohibits the transfer of
authorization on compassionate grounds if the authorized
dealer dies after reaching the age of 65 years or if the
transferee does not possess the prescribed qualifications.
They relied on the decision of a Co- ordinate Bench of
this Court in W.P. No. 13559/2020 and connected
petitions, which were disposed of on 23.12.2021, to
support their position.
5. After carefully considering the arguments
put forth by the learned counsels for the parties, the key
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:16520
WP No. 9197 of 2026
HC-KAR
point for deliberation is whether the petitioners are
entitled to the transfer of authorization to run fair price
shops on compassionate grounds.
6. Clause 13 of the unamended Public
Distribution System (Control Order, 1992) dealt with the
prohibition of the transfer of authorization. It states that no
authorized dealer shall assign or transfer their
authorization to any other person, nor shall any person
carry on business on behalf of such an authorized dealer.
However, a proviso to Clause 13 allows for the transfer of
authorization in the event of the death of an authorized
dealer, with prior approval of the Government, to the
spouse, son, or unmarried daughter of the deceased.
7. Subsequent amendments to Clause 13,
made in 2016, 2017, and 2021, introduced restrictions on
the transfer of authorization on compassionate grounds.
The amended provisions prohibit such transfers if the
authorized dealer was over the age of 65 at the time of
death or if the transferee had not completed the 10th
standard and did not apply for the transfer within 90 days
of the death.
8. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in W.P.
No. 13559/2022, upheld the validity of the amended
proviso to Clause 13, but it was dealing with a challenge
related to the renewal of authorization on compassionate
grounds. In W.P. No. 55097/2017,disposed of on
11.12.2017, this Court held that the condition regarding
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:16520
WP No. 9197 of 2026
HC-KAR
the age limit imposed in the amended Clause 13 was not
sustainable. The decision in W.P. No. 204335/2014,
which was followed in W.P. No. 43249/2017, ruled
similarly. Furthermore, in W.P. No. 103408/2023,
disposed of on 12.06.2023, this Court reiterated that the
restrictions introduced in the Control Orders of 2016,
2017, and 2021 were prospective in nature and could not
be applied retrospectively to authorizations granted under
the unamended Control Order of 1992. Therefore, these
restrictions are only applicable to applicants seeking fresh
authorizations and not to existing authorized dealers or
their legal heirs.
9. In W.P.No.51361/2019, the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court addressed the issue of whether
married daughters are entitled to the transfer of
authorization. In paragraph 3, it was held that the Control
Orders of 2016 and 2021, which provide for the transfer
of authorization to unmarried daughters or widowed
daughters with no source of income, cannot discriminate
against married daughters solely on the basis of their
marital status, provided they have no independent source
of income. Such discrimination violates Articles 14 and 15
of the Constitution of India, which guarantee equality
before the law and prohibit discrimination on the grounds
of sex. This view is supported by the decision in
Bhuvaneshwari, where the Court held that the principle
of equality extends to matters of compassionate
appointments as well. The Supreme Court also affirmed
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:16520
WP No. 9197 of 2026
HC-KAR
this view in S.L.P. (C) No. 20166/2021, disposed of on
17.12.2021.
10. The decision of the Co-ordinate Bench
clearly establishes that there can be no
discrimination between married and unmarried
daughters when it comes to the transfer of
authorization on compassionate grounds.
Discriminating against daughters based solely on
their marital status violates the principles of
equality enshrined in Articles 14 and 15 of the
Constitution of India.
11. In light of the foregoing, it is evident that
the spouse, sons, adopted sons, and both married
and unmarried daughters of deceased authorized
dealers , who have attained the age of 18 years,
are entitled to the transfer of authorization on
compassionate grounds. Denial of such transfers on
the grounds of marriage or other arbitrary criteria is
discriminatory and unsustainable in law.
Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i.
The writ petitions are allowed.
ii.
The impugned endorsements dated 17.11.2023,
06.06.2020, 05.03.2022, 23.11.2023,
25.11.2022, 03.11.2023, 28.11.2023,
- 8 -
NC: 2026:KHC:16520
WP No. 9197 of 2026
HC-KAR
21.11.2023, 22.12.2023, 19.12.2023,
21.12.2023, 15.12.2023, 06.01.2024,
18.02.2017, 12.02.2024, 01.02.2024,
19.02.2024, 27.02.2023,18.03.2024, 27.05.2024,
09.07.2024 and 10.06.2024 in
W.P.Nos.765/2024, 8370/2020, 7349/2022,
27695/2023, 24641/2022, 25399/2023,
28018/2023, 28312/2023, 688/2024, 729/2024,
766/2024, 961/2024, 2283/2024, 2608/2024,
6251/2024, 6467/2024, 7913/2024, 9669/2024,
10279/2024, 15907/2024, 18913/2024 and
19842/2024 issued by the Deputy/Joint Director,
Department of food, civil supplies and consumer
affairs are quashed.
iii.
The respondents are hereby directed to
reconsider the applications submitted by the
petitioners afresh keeping in mind the
observations made herein above, subject to
satisfying other requirements of existing control
order.
iv.
The said exercise shall be completed within
three months from the date of receipt of certified
copy of this order.”
6. The facts obtaining in the present case are identical to
the facts of the case involved in Tousif Khan (supra) and
consequently, the present petition also deserves to be allowed and
- 9 -
NC: 2026:KHC:16520
WP No. 9197 of 2026
HC-KAR
disposed of in the same terms.
7. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The petition is hereby allowed and disposed
of in terms of the judgment of the Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Sri. Tousif Khan Vs. The State of
Karnataka and Others W.P.No.765/2024
-
and connected matters dated
31.08.2024 .
ii) The impugned endorsement at Annexure-C
dated 18.02.2026 issued by respondent No.3
is hereby quashed.
iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.3
for reconsideration afresh in accordance with
law within a period of three months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)
JUDGE
MDS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16