AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Manjula Chellur, J.—The writ Petitioner has approached this Court in this appeal seeking for setting aside the order of the learned Single Judge by allowing his appeal.
The undisputed facts are as under:
A site bearing JMo.32 in Block No. 15 measuring 6 � 9 mtrs., situated in Arkavathi Layout was allotted to the Appellant on 24.6.2006 under the category of Economically Weaker Section (for short referred to as ''EWS''). Subsequently as he was not eligible to apply under the EWS category, they commenced the proceedings to cancel the said allotment after issuing show cause notice to the Appellant. Ultimately on 31.5.2006, the 1st Respondent passed an order canceling the allotment of site in favour of the Appellant. He made an application for re-allotment of the same, but the same came to be rejected on 27.8.2008 by the 2nd Respondent. Therefore, he approached this Court in W.P. No. 10732/2009.
The learned Single Judge on perusal of the entire material brought on record, ultimately dismissed the writ petition holding that he cannot be treated as an applicant coming under the General Category as there was no allocation of the site and under a false notion, he came under a EWS.
On perusal of the records, it would go to show that allotment of site was not on the first application itself. The first attempt was in the year 1987 for allotment of site when the applicant was not employed with Reserve Bank of India as a peon. He applied under the EWS category. Subsequently when he got the employment under Reserve Bank of India, the said information said to have been informed to the authority. When he filed seventh application for allotment of site, some information was sent, is the contention of the Appellant.
The Appellant had secured an employment in the year 1990 and the site in question was allotted to him in the year 2006. Therefore, as on the date of allotment of site in the year 2006 he was definitely suppressing the fact of him not coming under the EWS.
It is noticed that the Appellant, as per his application bearing No. 45752 submitted in the year 2002 had not applied for allotment of site under EWS category. Later on in the application bearing No. 136685 which was for allotment of a site in Arkavathi Layout, he has shown his annual income as Rs. 11,000/- (Rupees Eleven thousand only) which is quite opposite to the application bearing No. 45752. His pan number was also no* mentioned. The declaration made in the latest application-on which the site was allocated and the claim of the site as an unemployed person saying his annual income as Rs. 11,000/- is falsified by his earlier application bearing No. 45752. Therefore the allotment of site came to be cancelled.
Based on the above materials, learned Single Judge was justified in saying that even to consider the claim of the Appellant as a General Category, it is not available as there was no mistake on the part of the Respondent/authority and they had acted only on the information of the applicant given in his latest application, which ultimately led to the cancellation of the site. As the latest application upon which he was allotted a site said to contain false information regarding his income, definitely he is not entitled to seek for alternate, prayer to consider his case under the General Category. Therefore, we find no good ground to interfere with the opinion of the learned Single Judge.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.