A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.

Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition. The challenge in the writ petition was to the notification dated 02.06.2003 issued by the 1st respondent, laying down the guidelines with regard to the disposal of the properties held by the local bodies and also to a communication of the 2nd respondent dated 31.07.2004.

2. In a nutshell, the facts of the case as stated by the appellants is as follows:

Appellants are the members of a Hindu undivided family. 1st appellant is the kartha. Appellants are the owners of properties bearing Municipal Katha Nos.3299 & 3300 situated by the side of Hassan – Mysore Road at Holenarasipura. Appellants have established in their said property a petrol bunk in the name and style of "A.S. Parameshwaraiah and Brothers". Towards the eastern end of the petrol bunk, abutting to Hassan – Mysore Road, there is a property belonging to the Town Municipal Council. Appellants sought grant of the said site. By a communication dated 23.08.1985, 3rd respondent intimated the appellants that the property has been granted to them at an upset price of Rs.16/- per Sq.mtr. Appellants obtained katha of the said property vide an endorsement dated 18.8.198 and paid the tax. On 18.07.1989, Deputy Commissioner, Hassan District had in relation to grant of the said property, instructed the 3rd respondent to verify the proposal and fix the market price at Rs.47.64 ps. per Sq.mtr, pursuant to which, a decision was taken in the meeting of the 3rd respondent on 28.12.1989, fixing the price at Rs.48/- per Sq.mtr. On 12.06.2003, 1st respondent issued a Government Order dated 02.06.2003 specifying the persons to whom the lands belonging to a Municipality or other local bodies, could be granted. Contending that the notification is arbitrary and even otherwise did not relate to the earlier transactions, the same was questioned. Since the 3rd respondent had addressed a letter to the appellants, stating that, the grant made in their favour is cancelled and also took steps to dispose of the property by public auction by issuing a notice on 25.05.2005, the same were challenged.

3. 3rd respondent filed statement of objections. It contended that, the writ petitioners have not approached the court with clean hands and the statements made in the writ petition are distortion of facts, misleading & incorrect and such a course of action has been adopted with malafide intentions and oblique motives. Appellants had made an application for grant of the plot No.2776. On 08.06.1983, the issue came up before the Finance Committee which passed a resolution to grant the property to the appellants. On the date of passing the resolution, the 1st appellant happened to be the sitting Municipal Councilor and also the Chairman of the Finance Committee of the 3rd respondent. The meeting was presided over by the 1st appellant. The 3rd respondent did not had any Standing Committee as on 08.06.1983. It was stated that, the appellants have deliberately kept silent about the resolution dated 08.06.1993 of the Finance Committee, which was chaired by none other than the 1st appellant, who by virtue of his position as the Chairman of the Finance Committee, has wielded influence on the other members, in getting the resolution passed. The resolution is opposed to the principle "that no person can be a judge in his own cause". In view of the suppression of material facts, withholding of material information and the documents, the petitioners are guilty of "suppressio veri and suggestio falsi". On the very same day, Municipal Council passed a resolution i.e., after the Finance Committee passed its resolution, approving the grant of the property to the appellants. The market value of the land was fixed at Rs.16/- per Sq.mtr. By a notice dated 23.08.1985, appellants were called upon to tender Rs.7,040/-being the cost of the said property, i.e., subject to approval / sanction b