N. R. KUDOOR, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner Kunnegowda is the owner of Sy. No. 213/5 measuring 38 guntas of dry land situate in Kalenahalli Hosakoppal village of K. R. Nagar Taluk in mysore District. The said piece of land was proposed to be acquired under the karnataka Acquisition of Lands for Grant of House sites Act, 1972 (for short''the act") for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections of the people who are houseless and a notification No. LAQ. HSL. SR. 905/78-79 dated 11 3-79 under sub-section (1) of Sec. 3 of the Act was published by the State Government in the official Gazette. The petitioner was served with a notice dated 8-8-1979 as per Annexure-C under Sec. 3 (2) of the act calling upon him to show cause within 30 days why the land proposed to be acquired under the preliminary notification referred to above should not be acquired. The petitioner filed his objections raising the grounds against the proposal for acquisition of his land as notified. The 2nd respondent Assistant Commissioner, hunsur sub-division, after hearing the petitioner made a report to the Deputy commissioner over-ruling the objections raised by the petitioner and recommending to acquire the proposed land. The Deputy commissioner (1st respondent) accepting the report of the Assistant Commissioner ordered for the acquisition of the land for the purpose specified in the preliminary notification and directed issue of a final notification dated 25-1-1980 under sec. 3 (4) of the Act which was published in the official Gazette on 27-3-1980 as per annexure-D. Thereafter, the petitioner was served with a notice dated 15-4-1980 as per Annexure-E calling upon him to deliver possession of the land failing which the possession of the land would be taken under sub-sec. (7) of Sec. 3 of the Act. Being aggrieved by the various orders passed by the respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court through this writ petition under Arts 226 and 227 of the Constitution praying for an appropriate writ quashing the entire proceedings commencing with the issuance of the notice Annexure-C including Annexures-D and E and also a writ of mandamus to the respondents to forbear from taking any proceedings to acquire the land belonging to him which was the subject matter of the proceedings before the respondents. ( 2 ) NOTICE of the writ petition was served upon all the respondents and they are represented by Sri Sabarad, the learned high Court Government Pleader. The matter is listed under 'b' Group. Since the records of the proceedings are also available for reference, the matter is taken up for final hearing with the consent of the learned Advocates appearing on either side. ( 3 ) FROM the perusal of the records 0f the proceedings, it is obvious that the respondents have completely overthrown the guide lines enunciated by the Government in its order No. DPC 15 DRH 72 dated 13-5-1972 to be followed in the matter of acquisition of the lands for the purpose of the Act. Para-2 of the said government order deals with selection of sites, the relevant portion of which reads as follows :"the land required for implementation of the scheme will be obtained by utilisation of available Government land; or Gaonthana land where such land is available. Where no such land is available, land may be obtained by donations from philanthropic villagers and where this is not possible, by acquisition of suitable land under the Land acquisition Act. Lands of Scheduled castes or Tribes or of denotified tribes should not be acquired for the purpose. The following procedure is laid down for selection of land : a Committee consisting of Tahsildar, block Development Oiiicer, Officer-in-charge of the Primary Health Centre, social Welfare Inspector will be constituted in each taluk for the selection of proper village sites as per the scheme. The Block Development Officer will be the Convenor of the committee. The committee will make selection in consultation with the village panchayats. While doing so the Committee should bear in mind the following points among other things : (a) The land selected for acquisition should be non-controversial to avoid delay in acquisition proceedings as far as possible. (b) Where land has to be obtained from private parties the same may be secured by private negotiations on the basis of private transaction available in the neighbourhood as on the lines of the Trust Board Act. (c) The size of the site should not be less than 150 sq. yds. (d) The location should be nearer the village and working place of the prospective allottees. (e) The Land so selected should also be suitable from hygienic point of view. (c) The size of the site should not be less than 150 sq. yds. (d) The location should be nearer the village and working place of the prospective allottees. (e) The Land so selected should also be suitable from hygienic point of view. (f) The Assistant Commissioner should oversee the work. After selection of the sites, proposals should be sent immediately for acquisition of the land, clearly indicating therein the land that is to be granted under land Grant Rules, lands donated and the land to be acquired under the Land acquisition Act. Where the land is vested in Village Panchayats, proposals may be initiated for devesting the land from the |village panchayats under S. 49 (2) of the Mysore Village Panchayats and Local Boards Act, 1959, so as to make it available for grant, free of cost under the Land Grant Rules. " ( 4 ) IN the case on hand, the petitioner has filed his written objections against the proposed acquisition of his land, furnishing detailed grounds in his objection statement and in particular he has referred to a resolution dated 19-3-1979 of the village panchayat recording their opinion that the land belonging to the petitioner proposed to be acquired was not suitable for the sites etc. , forwarding a copy of the resolution along with his statement of objections for the consideration of the assistant Commissioner, Hunsur subdivision, to whom he submitted his statement of objections. A copy of the resolution of the Panchayat is found in the records. The panchayat in its resolution dated 19-3-1979 has clearly stated with reasons the unsuitabiiity of the land proposed to be acquired for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections of the people who are houseless. Besides, I also find a joint application, suggesting that lands comprised in Sy. Nos. 214/6 and 214/7 which are adjacent to the village are suitable and available for acquisition instead of the land of the petitioner proposed to be acquired which was far away from the village and not suitable for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections of the people. The Assistant Commissioner has dealt with the objections raised by the petitioner and also regarding the alternative suggestion to acquire Sy. No. 214 in his order dated 27-12-1979 as follows:-"case called. P. E. O. and objectors present. The B. D. O. has reported that only Sy. The Assistant Commissioner has dealt with the objections raised by the petitioner and also regarding the alternative suggestion to acquire Sy. No. 214 in his order dated 27-12-1979 as follows:-"case called. P. E. O. and objectors present. The B. D. O. has reported that only Sy. No. 213/5 as proposed now should be acquired. So far as other land i. e. , Sy. No. 214 is concerned, the b. D. O. rejects that it has 10 phodes and the holders are small farmers. So the land selected will have to be acquired though it is about one furlong away from the village. The objectors are not small holders. Hence their objections may be over-ruled and final notification issued. Recommended to D. C. "in pursuance of the Assistants commisioner's report dated 27-12-1979, the deputy Commissioner passed his order in cyclo-styled from on 4-1-1980 which reads as follows:-"in the circumstance reported by the assistant Commissioner, Hunsur subdivision, hunsur, the objections filed by Sri Kunnegowda and others are overruled. Sanction is also accorded for the issue of notification under sub-sec. (4) of Sec. 3 of the Karnataka Acquisition of Lands for Grant of House Sites act, 1972. "except the words 'hunsur' and 'kunne gowda', the rest of the order is in cyclo-styled form. It seems to me no further comment is necessary to disapprove the method in which the Deputy Commissioner has disposed of the matter on the basis of a report submitted by his subordinate officer viz. , the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner too has not considered the objections raised by the petitioner and also the availability of the other land for the purpose of acquisition in the proper perspective. It is stated by the learned Advocates appearing on either side after perusing the records that no report of the Block Development Officer dealing with the objections raised by the petitioner as called for by the Assistant commissioner is found in the records. Further Sri A. Shivaramiya, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, brought to my notice a circular dated 16-11-1979 issued by the Government to the concerned authorities bringing to their notice the guide lines under which they should act in the matter of acquiring lands for the purpose of the Act basing it on the Govt. Order dated 13-5-1972 referred hereinabove. Order dated 13-5-1972 referred hereinabove. After going through the entire matter including the records of the proceedings, I have no hesitation to hold that the respondents in this case have acted in utter disregard of the provisions of the law as well as the guidelines issued to them both under the Govt. Order dated 13-5-1972 and also the circular dated 16-11-1979. ( 5 ) BESIDES, the petitioner has produced an eye sketch Annexure-A giving the location of the village with reference to the lands surrounding the village including sy. No. 213 in which the land belonging to the petitioner proposed to be acquired is separately shown. To the east of the village immediately adjacent to it is sy. No. 214. Sy. No 213 is still towards the east of Sy. No. 214 and the portion of the land proposed to be acquired is the easternmost portion of the land in Sy. No. 213. In other words, the land that is proposed to be acquired is far away from the village and as disclosed from the records in this case there are other lands available which are situate nearer to the village. From the records I find there were petitions and counter petitions one set supporting the acquisition and the another set opposing the acquisition were presented to the authorities. This circumstance would go to show that all is not well with the proposed acquisition and the respondents herein have not considered the matter dispassionately keeping the guidelines issued to them in view in the matter of acquisition of the lands under the Act. ( 6 ) FOR the reasons stated above, I am inclined to hold that the entire acquisition proceedings subsequent to the Issue of the notice to the petitioner Annexure-C are invalid and liable to be quashed. ( 7 ) IN the result, the rule is issued and made absolute. The entire acquisition proceedings subsequent to the issue of notice Annexure-C are hereby quashed. It is open to the respondents to pursue the matter in accordance with law If they deem fit on the basis of the preliminary notification issued in the case. In the circumstances of the case, I direct each party to bear his own costs. --- *** --- .