T S PURADAPPA Vs. KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State common questions of law and that of fact arise for decision-making, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the petitions are clubbed together, finally heard and are disposed of by this order.

(2.) Petitioners serve the respondent-Karnataka Housing Board as Assistant Revenue Officers entrusted with the performance of the duties of a Competent Authority pursuant to the notification dated 20-8-1992 Annexure-A of the State Government. The term "Competent Authority" defined under Section 2(f) of the Karnataka Housing Board Act, 1962 (for short, 'Act') means, any person authorised by the State Government by notification to perform the functions of the Competent Authority under Chapter VI, in such area as may be specified by the notification. Chapter VI of the Act provides for power to evict persons from Board premises. Petitioners, aggrieved by the notification dated 1-12-2009 Annexure-E of the Housing Board and the notification dated 10-12-2009 Annexure-G of the State Government entrusting the Assistant Executive Engineers of the Karnataka Housing Board to perform the functions of the Competent Authority under the Act, have presented these petitions.

(3.) The main thrust of the case of the petitioners as aired by their learned Counsel is that the Assistant Executive Engineers do not possess either the required qualification or expertise, which the petitioners possess, in the matter of eviction of persons from Board premises. According to the learned Counsel, the Assistant Revenue Officers have the required knowledge and experience while the Assistant Executive Engineers have knowledge only with regard to aspects of construction of building and not the procedure relating to eviction of persons from Board premises.