(1.) The petitioners in all these matters are allottees of individual sites at the hands of the respondent- Shivamogga-Bhadravathi Urban Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'SBUDA', for short). The petitioners are aggrieved of subsequent orders of the cancellation of the allotments of sites. Therefore, all these matters were clubbed, heard together and disposed of by this common order.
(2.) From the material available on record, it is clear that complaints were received by the Lokayukta in the matter of allotment of sites by SBUDA. It appears that the Lokayukta conducted an enquiry and found irregularities and illegality in the matter of allotment of sites in the layout known as "Atal Bihari Vajapeyee Layout", which was formed by SBUDA. It appears that at the instance of the Lokayukta, the Urban Development Department of the State Government passed an order dtd. 30/7/2021, directing SBUDA to cancel all the allotments as found in paragraph No.72 (i) to (xxv). Following the said Government Order, the respondent-SBUDA passed the impugned order cancelling the allotments of sites made in favour of the petitioners.
(3.) Statement of objections have been filed at the hands of the respondent- SBUDA. Learned Counsel for SBUDA has taken this Court through the report of the Lokayukta under Sec. 7(2-A) read with Sec. 12(1) and 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, dtd. 2/12/2020. Learned Counsel submits that as per the enquiry report it is clear that enquiry proceedings were initiated by the Lokayukta against the Commissioner, SBUDA, the Former Commissioner, Commissioner of the City Municipal Council Shimogga, the President, Executive Engineer, Members of the Board of SBUDA, Assistant Engineer, Junior Engineers, etc. It is submitted that at Annexure-B I to XXII-D of the report a list of irregularities/illegality are set out. The list comprises of 25 types of irregularities/illegality. It was found that allotments were made under discretionary quota although the provision contained in Rule 13 (2) (J) of the Karnataka Urban Development (Allotment of sites) Rules, 1991, which enabled the Board to allot the sites under the discretionary quota was deleted on 7/11/2005. Therefore, the allotments made under the said provision were found to be illegal. It was found that allotments were made in favour of husband as well as wife in contravention of Rule 2(e) of the Rules, and allotments were made in favour of more than one person of the same family. Allotments were made in favour of persons who already owned houses/sites in contravention to Rule 12(2) of the Rules. Under the same provision, it was found that allotments were made to persons who were allotted sites by SBUDA, Karnataka Housing Board, Urban Development Authorities, etc. It was found that allotments were made in favour of persons who already owned sites/houses within the limits of SBUDA. It was found that regard was not had to the seniority or number of attempts and consequently, allotments were made to persons without adhering to the rule of seniority, as contemplated in Rule 13(1)(iv) of the Rules. Allotments were made to ineligible persons under the quota of Central Government Employees, State Government Employees, Ex- Servicemen, etc. It was found that allotments were made in favour of applicants who had not deposited the initial deposits. Allotments were made without collecting the residential certificates, caste certificate, employment certificate, income certificate, disability certificate or to persons who had furnished defective certificates.