Cancellation of an approved site allotment without notice violates principles of natural justice.

The petitioner, an education association, sought two sites from the Vijayapura Municipal Corporation to construct a school.

The Corporation resolved to allot the sites; the Deputy Commissioner approved the resolution while reducing the lease term from 50 years to 30 years, and the State approved the arrangement.

The petitioner paid the lease amount, entered into a lease agreement, and obtained approval of its building plan

The Deputy Commissioner later cancelled the allotment, stating that the sites were earmarked for a public park and that complaints had been received.

The petitioner challenged the cancellation order, contending that it was made without notice or a hearing

1. Whether the Deputy Commissioner could cancel the site allotment without giving the petitioner notice and an opportunity to be heard, after the allotment and related approvals had been acted upon

2. Whether the cancellation could be sustained on the ground that the sites were earmarked for a public park and their allotment would contravene the Karnataka Parks, Play-fields and Open Spaces (Preservation and Regulation) Act, 1985

The Court referred to the Karnataka Parks, Play-fields and Open Spaces (Preservation and Regulation) Act, 1985, observing that allotting land earmarked for a public park may contravene the Act.

It applied the principles of natural justice, holding that an authority should not cancel an allotment affecting accrued rights without first providing the affected party an opportunity to present objections and supporting material.

The petitioner’s allotment had proceeded through the Corporation’s resolution, the Deputy Commissioner’s approval, State approval, payment of the lease amount, execution of the lease, and approval of the building plan.

The Deputy Commissioner subsequently cancelled the allotment on park-designation and public-complaint grounds, but the order did not establish that the petitioner had been given notice or heard.

Because the cancellation affected rights that had accrued through the earlier actions of the authorities, the Court held that the decision-making process violated natural justice.

The park-related concern could be considered on reconsideration, but only after hearing the petitioner, the Corporation, and the appropriate planning authority.

It directed the Deputy Commissioner to give the petitioner an opportunity to submit objections and material, and then decide the matter in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner, the Corporation, and the appropriate planning authority.

Pending that decision, the nature of the allotted properties must not be changed, and the properties must not be allotted to any third party.