Full Judgment
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.105285 OF 2025 (GM-CON) BETWEEN: THE PROJECT DIRECOTR NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, N EAR JMIT COLLEGE NH-4, CHITRADURGA-577502, (WRONGLY ARRAYED IN THE CONSUMER COMPLAINT AS “PROJECT MANAGER”) …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SHRUTI CHANGHANTI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAKESH M.BILKI, ADVOCATE) AND: VN
1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER BADIGER KKRTC, BALLARI DIVISION, Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.08.07 12:00:40 +0530 BALLARI-583101.
2. THE PROJECT MANAGER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA PROJECT, IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, 1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, BEHIND RTO OFFICE, HOSPET-583201.
3. THE MANAGER NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, JAJARKALLU TOLL PLAZA, D. HIREHAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-585872. -2-
4. THE MANAGER NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, HIREHALLI TOLL PLAZA, NHAI-150-A IN KARNATAKA, CHITRADURGA DISTRCT-572168. …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING/ SETTING-ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 04.01.2025 PASSED BY THE DISTRICT
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BALLARI, ISSUING NOTICE ON THE COMPLAINT MADE BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 IN C.C. NO. 9/2025 TO THE PETITIONER, PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-F AND ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING/ SETTING-ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 21.05.2025 PASSED BY THE DISTRICT
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BALLARI, DEFERRING L.A. NO. 2 TILL HEARING OF C.C. NO. 9/2025 ON MERITS, PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-F AND ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING/ SETTINGASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16.07.2025 PASSED BY THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BALLARI, DISMISSING L.A. NOS. 3 TO 5 IN C.C. NO. 9/2025, PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-F. CONSEQUENTLY, DISMISS THE COMPLAINT DATED 26.12.2024 MADE BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 HEREIN IN C.C. NO. 9/2025, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, BALLARI, ON 01.01.2025, PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-A AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS AS THIS HON BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: -3-
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
1. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing/
setting-aside the order dated 04.01.2025 passed by commission, Ballari, issuing notice on the complaint made by respondent no. 1 in C.C. No. 9/2025 to the petitioner, produced herewith as ANNEXURE-F.
2. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing/
setting-aside the order dated 21.05.2025 passed by commission, Ballari, deferring I.A. No. 2 till hearing of C.C. No. 9/2025 on merits, produced herewith as ANNEXURE-F.
3. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing/ setting-aside the order dated 16.07.2025 passed by commission, Ballari, dismissing I.a. Nos. 3 to 5 in C.C. No. 9/2025, produced herewith as ANNEXURE- F.
4. Consequently, dismiss the complaint dated
26.12.2024 made by respondent no. 1 herein in c.c. No. 9/2025, pending on the file of the district consumer disputes redressal commission, Ballari, on 01.01.2025, produced herewith as ANNEXURE-A.
5. Pass such other orders/ directions as this Hon’ble court may be pleased to under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice and equity. -4-
2. The grievance of the petitioner pertains to the
maintainability of a complaint filed before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, contending that the subject transaction does not qualify as a consumer dispute.
3. It is well settled that such objections must be raised before the Consumer Commission itself, which is competent to decide the issue of maintainability based on the facts and applicable law.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the version filed by the petitioner was not taken on record by the Consumer Commission on the ground of limitation.
5. Even if the petitioner is aggrieved by any such
procedural order, the appropriate course would be to approach the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission under the provisions of the Consumer -5- Protection Act, and not to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court at this stage.
6. In view of the availability of an alternative and efficacious remedy, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Hence, the following:
ORDER
i. The writ petition stands disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy available under law, including approaching the State Consumer Commission, if so advised. ii. All contentions are left open. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE VB CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 79