'In Consonance With Article 15(3)': Karnataka High Court Upholds Land Reservation For Construction Of Girls' Hostel

Petitioners Pramoda and others had challenged the Deputy Commissioner's order dated March 20, on the grounds that Vinobhanagar in Udupi District is a locality where members of the Scheduled Caste community reside. They do not have any premises for conducting community activities or functions, and hence they had made a representation for grant of the land to an extent of 0.14 cents for construction of Ambedkar Bhavan. The said premise was to be utilized for activities of the community and would be beneficial to all residents of the said area. He submitted that, instead, the Deputy Commissioner has reserved the aforesaid extent of land for building a girls' hostel for post-matriculation. The same would not serve the purpose of the residents of the locality.

Advocate Harish Ganapathy appearing for the petitioners submitted that area in which the petitioners are residing is away from the schools and colleges and therefore, the construction of a girls' hostel would not be of any benefit at all. Instead, the community hall would benefit the residents of the locality. Therefore, the court was requested to quash the Deputy Commissioner's order and direct that the said land be granted for construction of Ambedkar Bhavan.

Advocate Vani H appearing for the state opposed the petition. It was contended that,

"Construction of a Girls' Hostel in the said area would be suitable for all those girl students who wish to pursue their studies post-matriculation and therefore would be beneficial to the said students."

Further it was contended that,

"The purpose for which the lands have been reserved, being for the benefit of girls, cannot be assailed by these petitioners having regard to Article 15(3) of the Constitution of India."

Article 15 (3) reads thus: Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.

In this backdrop, the High Court ruled:

"The representation made by the petitioners was only for grant of the said land and not to seek any right in the said extent of land. Though the representation of the petitioners was made on 24/08/2020, the fact remains that the second respondent has in his discretion, reserved the two parcels of land for the purpose of Girls' Hostel Post Matriculation, having regard to the communication received on 28/06/2019 referred to in the order dated 30/03/2021. Therefore, the petitioners herein cannot seek a right insofar as the said extent of land is concerned for the purpose of the same being granted to them for the construction of a community hall."

The court clarified "If the petitioners are still interested in constructing a community hall in the locality, they are at liberty to make a fresh representation to the second respondent for grant of any other land available in the locality and the second respondent may consider the said representation, in accordance with law."

Click Here to Download the Order

Read the Order Below