M. RAMAKRISHNA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a public litigation writ petition under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of india, in which the petitioners have challenged the action taken by the respondents and have sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3: (1) not to convert the gomal land and form sites in sy. No. 19 at bidalota village, holuvanahalli hobli, koratagere taluk, measuring 30 acres 19 guntas and to grant such other relief as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case, and in the interest of justice. The brief facts of the case are as follows : sy. No. 19 of bidalota village measures about 30 acres 19 guntas. It is stated that there is a large number of population in the village bidalota with a large number of cattle. The land in question was earmarked as gomal to wit, to graze the cattle of the village. To demonstrate this, index of lands, Annexure-A is produced, wherein it is mentioned that the competent authority by its order dated 24. 4. 1947 in proceedings No. 493-168/46-47 reserved this land with a gokatte to be made use of by the villagers for grazing their cattle.

( 2 ) THE grievance of the petitioners is that the state government under the scheme known as "ashraya" launched in the name of late suit. Indira gandhi distributed hakpatras in the names of several persons in the village in respect of sites to be formed in the land is question and that, according to them, if the land is converted into house sites, the very purpose for which it was reserved would be defeated. Hence this petition.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners placed reliance upon the Provisions of Section 71 of the Karnataka land revenue Act, 1964 ('the act' for short) read with Rule 97 (4) of the rules, framed thereunder. He placed reliance upon two decisions of this court in support of the writ petition : 1. 1976 (1) kar. L. j. 380, Manjunatha v State of Karnataka; 2. In Javare Gowda v Divisional Commissioner, W. P. No. 2708/1974, disposed on 28-6-1976.

( 4 ) SRI Thimme Gowda, learned high court government pleader, appearing for the respondents, however submits that in the instant case, the deputy commissioner, first respondent, has passed an order on 15-11-1991 directing 25 acres of land out of 30 acres 19 guntas in sy. No. 19 to be converted into house sites and distributed to the needy people in pursuance of the direction given by the government under the scheme "ashraya". The submission of high court government pleader is that the land in question having been released to the extent of 25 acres in exercise of power under Section 71 of the Karnataka land revenue act read with Rule 97 (4) of the rules framed thereunder, the order of the deputy commissioner is perfectly justified and therefore the villagers have no right to challenge the said order.

( 5 ) ANOTHER submission of the learned high court government pleader is that pursuant to the order of the deputy commissioner, the respondents 4 and 5 prepared a list of houseless persons numbering 273 and,a site plant to form about 276 sites out of the said land. Therefore, it cannot be said that the action taken by the respondents is illegal or calls for interference.

( 6 ) IN order to appreciate the rival -contentions urged in this petition, it is better to refer to Section 71 of the act. It reads :"lands may be assigned for special purposes and when assigned shall not be otherwise used without sanction of the deputy commissioner subject to the general orders of the state government, survey officers, whilst survey operations are proceeding under this Act, and at any other time, the deputy commissioner, may set apart lands, which are the property of the state government and not in the lawful occupation of any person or aggregate of persons in any village or portions of a village, for free pasturage for the village cattle, for forest reserves or for any other public purpose; and lands assigned specially for any such purpose shall not be otherwise used without the s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document