Karnataka HC quashes Commission’s order for allotting site to differently-abled person who had not filed application

You don’t have any Active Subscription.

Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription

The High Court of Karnataka has quashed an order by the State Commission for Persons with Disabilities that directed the Mandya Urban Development Authority (MUDA) to allot a site to a differently-abled individual even though he had not submitted any application for site allotment.

The court held that merely qualifying as a person with a disability does not automatically entitle an individual to a site without following the prescribed procedure.

Justice Suraj Govindaraj passed the order while allowing a petition filed by MUDA, which had questioned the Commissioner’s August 8, 2013 order.

Mysuru-based P. Chandrashekar, a social activist with 80% locomotor disability, had complained to the Commission that MUDA had failed to allot a site to him despite his registration seeking allotment in 2007.

The court ruled that under the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Rules, 1991, a person must apply in the prescribed form in response to a public notification inviting applications for the allotment of sites by an Urban Development Authority.

Mere registration with a nominal fee does not constitute a valid application, as every registered person, including persons with disabilities, must apply for the allotment of a site by paying a minimum deposit amount along with an application form when the Urban Development Authorities invite applications, notifying the number of sites available under different categories, the court said.

MUDA had told the court that it had last invited applications for allotment of around 2,100 sites way back in 2002 by reserving 2% of the total sites, that is, 42 sites, for persons with disabilities at the Vivekananda Nagar layout formed in 2002. MUDA also said that only 11 individuals applied under the persons with disabilities category, and they were allotted sites. The complainant had neither registered nor filed an application during that period.

The court did not accept Mr. Chandrashekar’s plea to direct MUDA to allot him a site, as only 11 sites reserved for persons with disabilities were allotted in 2002. The court noted that MUDA has not invited applications for allotment of sites since 2002, as it was barred from undertaking such an exercise due to pending investigation into the alleged illegalities in allotment of sites through lottery.

However, the court granted liberty to Mr. Chandrashekar to apply in the prescribed form whenever applications were invited in the future, while directing MUDA to give him the benefit of seniority.

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.