ANNAPPA. G Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) It is submitted that the second petitioner has already vacated the premises. Hence, the petition by the second petitioner does not survive for consideration.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that he was allotted a quarters in the year 2012 by the second respondent- APMC Committee. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the residential quarters have been constructed by the second respondent-Committee and was for the purpose of housing the employees of the Marketing Committee. That the bylaw also permitted the Marketing Committee to let out the same, in the event quarters remain vacant, to staff of other Government Departments and hence, the Marketing Committee taking a sympathetic view of the petitioner had allotted the vacant quarters.