The non-establishment of an educational institution even after a lapse of two decades on a civic amenity (CA) site allotted for that purpose is nothing but violation of the right to education of children, who could have studied there had the institution been set up, said the High Court of Karnataka.
“This site has remained unutilised for a period of more than two decades, that is till date, after it was allotted... As a consequence, the right to education of those who would have studied, should the school or educational institution have been established in this site in terms of stipulation of allotment, has been brutalised, to say the least,” observed the court.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Prasanna B. Varale and Justice Krishna S. Dixit made these observation while dismissing an appeal filed by Divyajyothi Vidya Kendra (DVK), a registered society, at Yelahanka New Town. The appellant had questioned a judge’s July 2023 order of upholding the Karnataka Housing Board’s 2018 decision of cancelling the CA site allotted to DVK at Sector-B, Yelahanka New Town.
“When the State is not in a position to cater to the educational needs on its own, it does it with the mediation of private agencies and that is how the civic amenity sites are earmarked for allotment to the intending caterers... Had the site in question been allotted to some worthy person, that would have served the public purpose for which it was earmarked,” the Bench observed.
The Bench termed that all the students, who could have studied in such an educational institution, are the inarticulate stakeholders in the allotment and the execution of the purpose for which the allotment of CA site was made in favour of DVK.
The KHB had allotted the huge site in favour of DVK in 2003 and handed over the possession of the site in October 2005 on lease-cum-sale basis on the condition that allottee should start an educational institution by putting up construction within two years. However, DVK did not even start construction till 2015, and though construction started much later, it still remained incomplete, the court noted.
While directing the KHB to determine the quantum of forfeiture of the CA site and refund the remaining amount in a time-bound manner within four weeks, the Bench also directed DVK to deliver the possession of the property in an as is where is position to the KHB.
