Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, C.N. Balasubramanyam, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, seeking to quash the final list published by the respondent, the Commissioner of Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA), on 11.08.2017 regarding the allotment of sites in R.T. Nagar, Mysore, under scheme No.1/2011-12 dated 19.09.2011. The petitioner contended that the allotment list was illegal, unjust, ultra vires, arbitrary, capricious, and in violation of principles of natural justice. The respondent opposed the petition, arguing that the allotment was made in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations. The court, after hearing both sides, examined the pleadings and found that the petitioner had not demonstrated any legal right to a site or any specific violation of statutory provisions. The court noted that the writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 is discretionary and should not be exercised lightly. The petitioner's allegations of violation of natural justice were not supported by adequate pleadings or evidence. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, holding that no interference was warranted. The judgment was delivered on 31st October 2023 by Justice Suraj Govindaraj.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India - Scope of Judicial Review - The petitioner sought quashing of the final allotment list published by the Mysore Urban Development Authority. The Court held that the writ jurisdiction is discretionary and cannot be invoked in the absence of a clear legal right or violation of statutory provisions. The petitioner failed to establish any illegality or arbitrariness in the allotment process. (Paras 1-3) B) Administrative Law - Principles of Natural Justice - Applicability - The petitioner alleged violation of natural justice but did not provide specific pleadings or evidence to support the claim. The Court observed that mere assertion without substantiation is insufficient to warrant interference. (Paras 1-3) C) Urban Development - Allotment of Sites - Mysore Urban Development Authority - Rules and Regulations - The allotment was made pursuant to a scheme No.1/2011-12 dated 19.09.2011. The Court found that the respondent had followed the prescribed procedure and the petitioner had no vested right to a site. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the final list of allotment of sites published by the respondent on 11.08.2017 is illegal, unjust, ultra vires, arbitrary, capricious, and in violation of principles of natural justice, warranting interference under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is discretionary and not to be exercised in the absence of a legal right or violation of statutory provisions
- Principles of natural justice must be pleaded and proved
- Allotment of sites by development authorities is subject to their own rules and regulations
