RAJESAB Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common question of facts and law would arise in these intra-court appeals for consideration, they are taken up together for consideration and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Petitioners and/or their predecessors in interest were allotted shops at Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee, Savanur (hereinafter referred to as 'APMC', for short) way back in the year 2007 and they have continued in said shops premises even after completion of leave and license period. At this juncture, it would be apt and appropriate to notice that on completion of lease-cum-license period, APMC initiated proceedings under Section 4 of the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1974 (for short, 'Act') which resulted in order of eviction being passed and same having been affirmed by learned District Judge in respective appeals filed by petitioners has also been challenged in the writ petitions. It would also necessary to notice that on completion of leasecum- license period, APMC intended to allot shops by auction and as such initiated proceedings for conducting auction and on said proceedings having been undertaken by APMC, petitioners were successful bidders. However, proposal forwarded by APMC and approval by Additional Director, Agricultural Marketing Department, Government of Karnataka was rejected by intimating APMC that process of auction conducted was not in accordance with law and extant regulations. This order/endorsement/communication was not challenged by petitioners for a period of almost three years and appeal was filed before Minister for Horticulture and Agriculture cum appellate authority which came to be examined by said authority and appeal came to be dismissed. Pursuant to same, APMC sought to enforce order of eviction against the petitioners which were also called in question in said writ petitions.

(3.) Learned Single Judge by order under appeal was of the view that prayer sought for by the petitioners cannot be granted. However, was inclined to extend time to quit and handover vacant possession of their respective shops on or before 30.03.2019 and as such has directed the petitioners to file their individual affidavits undertaking to handover possession on or before 30.03.2019. Accordingly, petitioners filed their affidavit undertaking and writ petitions came to be disposed of by directing them to quit and hand over their respective shops on or before 30.03.2019 to 3rd respondent-APMC. Petitioners were also directed to pay all the dues including the rents and other levies which were required to be paid by them to 3rd respondent, till date of vacating and handing over possession of their shops to 3rd respondent-APMC and liberty was also granted to APMC to proceed with auction proceedings and petitioners were also held to be eligible to participate in said auction proceedings.