<p>The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tag/karnataka-high-court" target="_blank">Karnataka High Court </a>has said that the principal secretary or the commissioner, the Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, has to take note of litigations concerning the public distribution system.</p>.<p>Justice M Nagaprasanna said that the court is flooded with cases concerning the public distribution system (PDS) and observed that the authorities have to take note of these and put their house in order. </p>.<p>The petitioner, a resident of Doddabidarakallu, had challenged the September 20, 2022 order passed by the additional director (appellate authority) cancelling his licence to run a fair price shop at Rajajinagar in Bengaluru. Another shop in the vicinity had approached the appellate authority with a prayer for restoration of cards which were taken away to allot to the petitioner. The petitioner said that the appellate authority exceeded the brief and set aside the entire allotment made in his favour. As per the government order, there should be 800 cards to a fair-price shop in the urban area and 500 cards in the rural area.</p>.<p>Justice M Nagaprasanna noted that in a communication issued on August 7, 2020, the Commissioner of Food and Civil Supplies had instructed all deputy directors to exercise caution while allotting fair price shops and that new operations should be considered only after verification of documents without giving scope to any allegation or complaint.</p>.<p>“This remains only on paper. In every allotment, there would be a complaint and those complaints galore before this court by way of filing writ petitions. It is this that has to be looked into by the competent authority – either the 1st respondent (Principal Secretary) or the 2nd respondent in particular, the Commissioner, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs and put its house in order,” the court said.</p>.<p>The court further noted the submission made by the government that the policy today is one nation – one ration card, whereby any cardholder can pick up his ration from any fair price depot. “If that is the policy, it is for the State to take the policy forward and redress all these problems of taking away ration cards from one, and giving it to another, at the whim and fancy of the officers - the 4th respondent – Deputy Director or any other Officer in charge of such distribution,” the court said.</p>.<p>The court allowed the petition in part and remitted the matter back to the appellate authority to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tag/karnataka-high-court" target="_blank">Karnataka High Court </a>has said that the principal secretary or the commissioner, the Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, has to take note of litigations concerning the public distribution system.</p>.<p>Justice M Nagaprasanna said that the court is flooded with cases concerning the public distribution system (PDS) and observed that the authorities have to take note of these and put their house in order. </p>.<p>The petitioner, a resident of Doddabidarakallu, had challenged the September 20, 2022 order passed by the additional director (appellate authority) cancelling his licence to run a fair price shop at Rajajinagar in Bengaluru. Another shop in the vicinity had approached the appellate authority with a prayer for restoration of cards which were taken away to allot to the petitioner. The petitioner said that the appellate authority exceeded the brief and set aside the entire allotment made in his favour. As per the government order, there should be 800 cards to a fair-price shop in the urban area and 500 cards in the rural area.</p>.<p>Justice M Nagaprasanna noted that in a communication issued on August 7, 2020, the Commissioner of Food and Civil Supplies had instructed all deputy directors to exercise caution while allotting fair price shops and that new operations should be considered only after verification of documents without giving scope to any allegation or complaint.</p>.<p>“This remains only on paper. In every allotment, there would be a complaint and those complaints galore before this court by way of filing writ petitions. It is this that has to be looked into by the competent authority – either the 1st respondent (Principal Secretary) or the 2nd respondent in particular, the Commissioner, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs and put its house in order,” the court said.</p>.<p>The court further noted the submission made by the government that the policy today is one nation – one ration card, whereby any cardholder can pick up his ration from any fair price depot. “If that is the policy, it is for the State to take the policy forward and redress all these problems of taking away ration cards from one, and giving it to another, at the whim and fancy of the officers - the 4th respondent – Deputy Director or any other Officer in charge of such distribution,” the court said.</p>.<p>The court allowed the petition in part and remitted the matter back to the appellate authority to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.</p>
