ORDER N.K. Patil, J. Petitioner in this petition has sought for quashing the order passed by the first respondent dated 3rd October 2008 filed as Annexure-A to the writ petition. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that, petitioner is the proprietor of Sri. Venkateshwara Traders dealing with all general items including rice and other items and petitioner belongs to depressed class of the society, namely Scheduled Caste. Petitioner had been enrolled under Value Added Tax having the TIN No.29360729545 as per the Registration Certificate produced at Annexure B. In pursuance of the tender notification calling for supply of essential commodities, to the Hostels for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe students at Malur town, petitioner has been awarded the contract for the academic years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 respectively. After expiry of the period for the academic year 200708, the Executive Officer of the Taluk Panchayat, Malur has requested the petitioner to supply the essential commodities for the year 2008-09 till the tender process is completed. In pursuance of the communication received from the competent authority dated 31st May 2008, petitioner has continued to supply the essential food grains and other ancillary items as per the needs of the Hostel. 3. Be that as it may, to the shock and surprise of the petitioner, he received the impugned communication dated 3rd October 2008 asking the petitioner not to further supply the essential food grains to the Hostel as they have made some alternative arrangement and that, it is the case of petitioner that, the said alternative arrangement made in pursuance of the impugned communication dated 3rd October 2008 is, without calling for tender as per the relevant provisions of the Act and Rules and, prohibiting the petitioner from supplying the essential food grains and hence, the same is not justifiable and is not sustainable in view of non affording of reasonable opportunity to petitioner, resulting in non compliance of the principles of natural justices. Therefore, being aggrieved by the same, petitioner herein felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition, seeking appropriate reliefs, as stated supra. 4. The principal submission canvassed by learned Counsel appearing for petitioner at the outset is that, petitioner is entitled to continue the supply of essential food grains as per the previous contract till the fresh tender notification is issued and finalization of the lowest bid. 4. The principal submission canvassed by learned Counsel appearing for petitioner at the outset is that, petitioner is entitled to continue the supply of essential food grains as per the previous contract till the fresh tender notification is issued and finalization of the lowest bid. Till that stage, petitioner is entitled to continue in pursuance of the communication issued by the Chief Executive Officer of the Taluk Panchayat, Malur and in view of the well settled law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Mahabir Auto Stores and others Vs. Indian Oil Corporation and Others reported in (1990) 3 Supreme Court Cases 752, petitioner should have been afforded an opportunity of hearing in the matter before making alternative arrangement. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned communication is liable to be set aside and petitioner may be permitted to supply the essential food grains and other ancillary items to cater to the needs of the respective inmates of the Hostel belonging to. the depressed class of the society for the year 2008-09. 5. Having heard learned Counsel appearing for petitioner and after perusal of the material on record, including the grounds urged by petitioner, it emerges that, the impugned communication dated 3rd October 2008 has been issued by first respondent, with reference to the representation dated 1st October 2008 submitted by the Karnataka Dalit Students Union, Malur Taluk and the order of the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat dated 1st October 2008 and on the ground that, it is causing inconvenience to the inmates of the Hostel. The member of the Zilla Panchayat after visiting the spot and after hearing the grievances of the students of the Hostel has asked the authorities not to obtain the food grains from petitioner and to make alternative arrangement temporarily on credit basis from some other shop till the tender process is completed. Petitioner can neither maintain this writ petition questioning the correctness of the impugned communication without assailing the correctness of the order passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat dated pt October 2008, as referred in the impugned communication, nor is he entitled to claim to supply the food grains, as a matter of right to the students in the hostel at Malur. The impugned communication is issued after making spot inspection by the first respondent along with the Member of the Zilla Panchayat and after due deliberation with the students of the Hostel and also after intimating the petitioner over telephone. Therefore, taking into consideration the ground reality and the grievance of the students who are staying in the Hostel and in the light of the order passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat, Malur, the impugned communication is issued by the competent authority. I do not find any error or unreasonableness as such committed by the authority in issuing the impugned communication, prohibiting the supply of essential food grains and other ancillary articles from the petitioner nor the petitioner is entitled to redress his grievance before this Court, invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction, as a matter of right. Therefore, interference by this Court, in the impugned communication is not justifiable. Hence, the writ petition filed by petitioner is liable to be dismissed as misconceived. 6. Further, regarding the judgment relied upon by the learned Counsel for petitioner, I am of the view that there is no dispute, quarrel or second opinion regarding well settled law laid down by the Apex Court, but the said case relied by petitioner is not applicable to the case on hand and is of no assistance to him in the instant writ petition. 7. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the writ petition filed by petitioner is liable to be dismissed as devoid of merits. Accordingly, it is dismissed.