IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR WRIT PETITION NOS.29258-29259/2018 (APMC) BETWEEN 1. ANNAPPA. G S/O VEERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT HOUSE NO.B-3, APMC QUARTERS, NEAR FIRE ENGINE OFFICE, PB ROAD, DAVANAGERE-577003.
2. FAKRUDDIN BASHA, S/O ABDUL HAFEEZ, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT HOUSE NO.B-2, APMC QUARTERS, NEAR FIRE ENGINE OFFICE, PB ROAD, DAVANAGERE-577003.
(BY SRI SHANTHARAJ K, ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE SECRETARY APMC DAVANAGERE-577003.
(BY SRI S.T.NAIK, HCGP FOR R1, SRI T.SWAROOP, ADV. FOR R2.) ... PETITIONERS ... RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED EVICTION NOTICES DATED 21.6.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER ANNEXURES-C1 AND C2 AS ILLEGAL ERRONEOUS ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD RESULTING IN MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents.
2. It is submitted that the second petitioner has already vacated the premises. Hence, the petition by the second petitioner does not survive for consideration.
3. The case of the petitioner is that he was allotted a quarters in the year 2012 by the second respondent- APMC Committee. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the residential quarters have been constructed by the second respondent-Committee and was for the purpose of housing the employees of the Marketing Committee. That the bylaw also permitted the Marketing Committee to let out the same, in the event quarters remain vacant, to staff of other Government Departments and hence, the Marketing Committee taking a sympathetic view of the petitioner had allotted the vacant quarters.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that thereafter a scheme was formulated vide Annexure-R1 dated 08.12.2017 whereby the Central Government has come forward with a proposal to subsidize 50% of the cost going into construction of covered auction platforms and that in this regard the Committee has set apart 500 lakhs and matching sum has also been granted by the Central Government and if the scheme is not implemented within a stipulated period, the fund allocation would lapse and hence, the second respondent-Committee has come up with an approved plan to construct four blocks of covered auction platforms and that for the said purpose 14 quarters are required to be demolished and that the second respondent has already demolished 12 quarters and only the two quarters, which were under the occupation of the petitioners are left over and if the same are removed it would make way for the Committee to commence the project.
5. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioner is gainfully employed with the Health Department as a driver and it could also be stated with authority that paucity of housing is not one of the problems faced by the Davangere Corporation within whose limit the petitioner is living. It is not in dispute that the premise is sought by the second respondent for a laudable object i.e. a public purpose of facilitating the farming community to sell their notified and non-notified produces. It is also not in dispute that the project is being implemented across the State solely for the benefit of farmers. It is also not in dispute that the premises in occupation of the petitioner and other quarters are abutting the road and would be advantageous for the farmers to bring their commodity and also for consumers if the covered auction platforms are established in the proximity of the road. That apart the petitioner has no vested right to remain in occupation and is merely a licensee.
Hence, the petitions being devoid of merits are rejected.
It is made clear that the petitioner shall vacate and hand over the premises by 31.08.2019. The time to vacate and hand over the premises to the second respondent is granted subject to condition that the petitioner shall furnish an undertaking to that effect on or before 16.07.2019.
In view of the above orders passed, I.As. do not survive for consideration.
Chs* CT-HR Sd/- JUDGE