T. N. VALLINAYAGAM, J. ( 1 ) THOUGH the matter is posted for preliminary hearing in 'b' group, the same is taken up for final disposal by consent of the parties. ( 2 ) THESE petitions are preferred by five petitioners who want to challenge the grant of lands made as early as on 8-12-1978 for a public purpose viz. , establishment of Karnataka Antibiotics and Pharmaceuticals limited. 2a. It is submitted by the learned Government Advocate as well as by the respondent that the allotment of land at the first instance was made as early as on 8-12-1978. In fact the grant was for 30 acres of land in Sy. Nos. 22 and 80 of Kadabagere, and the proceedings of the Government of Karnataka is to the following effect:"order No. RD 307 LGB 78, Bangalore dated 8-12-1978 after considering the above proposal, Government are pleaded to accord sanction for the grant of land measuring 30 acres viz. , 10. 00 acres of land in S. No. 22 and 20 acres of land in S. No. 80 of kadabagere Village, Nelamangala Taluk in favour of the hindustan Antibiotics Limited, Pimpri, Poona subject to the payment of an upset price of Rs. 1,500 per acre plus conversion of fine as per the rules and also subject to the condition that in addition to putting up of plants for the production of certain drugs, the Hindustan Antibiotics Limited, will also grow some medicinal plants for purposes of research on an anti-cancer drugs. The Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District, shall take immediate steps to transfer the land to the Hindustan antibiotics". It was granted for an upset price of Rs. 1,500/- per acre + conversion charges etc. Now this order was not challenged by the petitioners at any point of time, for over 19 years as on the date of filing the writ petitions. The Government has granted the very same land to the original company hindustan Antibiotics Limited, which Company along with the government of Karnataka has formed a new Company called Karnataka antibiotics and Pharmaceuticals Limited, that is the 5th respondent and it is only a mere change in the nomenclature and not the grant. Nobody having challenged the grant made in 1978, in my opinion, the challenge now sought to be made is not maintainable. A man cannot sleep for 19 years and then challenge the grant. Nobody having challenged the grant made in 1978, in my opinion, the challenge now sought to be made is not maintainable. A man cannot sleep for 19 years and then challenge the grant. The obvious reason appears to be that second petitioner's husband was sued as defendant No. 44 in O. 3. No. 314 of 1997 on the file of Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District for an injunction on the ground that he along with 50 others are trying to trespass on the land. Now cleverly even without mentioning the name of the husband, describing herself as daughter of Late Changaiah, she has joined as one of the petitioners to the writ petition and her writ petition has been separately numbered as 33861 of 1991. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking revenge and "teach a lesson" to the Company which is now trying to build up an industry. ( 3 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners Mr. Joshi, contended that it is the knowledge of the grant that is criteria and his client came to know about the allotment to the present Company only in 1992, the other petitioners are not fully equipped with the facts of the case. As rightly pointed out by the 5th respondent they have suppressed material facts before this Court and have approached this Court with unclean hands. It is needless to point out that it is only an attempt to coerce the 5th respondent to allow the petitioners to freely encroach upon the lands allotted to 5th respondent by the Government as early as in 1978. In fact this Court has deprecated certain attempts made by the petitioners claiming to be small villagers, in the case of H. Gopala Gowda and another v State of Karnataka and Others, wherein it has been held as follows:"in the facts and circumstances of the case it appears to us that it is a case of heartburning by the 'haves' as against the 'have-nots' or the 'less-haves', totally forgetting the social obligations they should have to the less fortune ones. All the more, one cannot forget that social justice is the very Constitutional scheme of ours and that being so, in the act of distribution of the lands to the landless or the land-poor in passing the impugned order by the respondent 5-Tahsildar, he had only acted in aid of that Constitutional scheme of the respondent 1-State. In giving the special sanction in the case in hand for grant of land to the respondents 6 to 31 and others, the State and its Authorities in fact had discharged that Constitutional obligation to the society, of which the respondents 6 to 31 and 5 other non-party applicants were part and parcel. In this context, we want to discuss few lines about the social justice, vis-a-vis, the social obligation of the public spirited persons and the social activists as that of the petitioners herein, as we thought it appropriate to do and befitting to the occasion. THE term 'social justice' in the Indian context has got history and heritage. The term 'social justice' had emerged from the 'social justice' in-built in our society due to its working system, thinking and prejudices. According to Justice P. Venugopal, the former judge of Madras High Court, the 'social justice' is the product of 'social justice' and that imparting social justice will bring cohesiveness by removal of the source of very disunity and disharmony in the society. In his book under the title, 'social justice and Reservation' (at pg. 1, 1990 publication), Justice venugopal had philosophically but with genuine concern for the amelioration of the vulnerable section of the society observed, probably rightly, as hereunder:"social Justice is the product of social injustice and seeks to remove social disability by birth resulting, in social and economic inequality. It ensures equality of status, equality of opportunity and developmental facilities to all. It has a vital social content intended to promote Public Welfare. It not only provides for a just society, but also removes all patent sources of disunity and disharmony. Thus Social Justice is of great value in providing a stable society and securing the unity of India". IN the facts and circumstances of the case that the poor grantees had to come up yet again before this Court, we deem it fit to award a cost of Rs. 5,000/- each as against the petitioners. Thus Social Justice is of great value in providing a stable society and securing the unity of India". IN the facts and circumstances of the case that the poor grantees had to come up yet again before this Court, we deem it fit to award a cost of Rs. 5,000/- each as against the petitioners. Let that cost be paid by the petitioners to all the contesting respondents 6 to 10, 13 to 22, 24 to 29 within 6 weeks from this date. It is also added here that in the event of non-payment of the cost herein awarded on the petitioners as directed as above, the said contesting respondents are at liberty to recover the same from the petitioners in the process known to law". In fact, the Division Bench frowned upon such practice being done by people calling themselves as small villagers. ( 4 ) THE only ground on which the attack is made is that the Gomal lands cannot be allowed. But even this position has been made clear by the dictum of this Court in the case of A. G. Basavarajappa and Others v state of Karnataka and Others, which is to the following effect:"6. It is not the case of the petitioners that the proposed reduction of the Gomal land or the grant of lands to the unauthorised landless occupants is prohibited by law. All that the petitioners complain is that the reduction of the total extent of gomal reserve would deprive the villagers of their rights to use gomal land for grazing purpose of their cattle. 7. It is no doubt true that in every village, under a governmental policy, which has assumed the form of Legislative measure, lands are earmarked for the purpose of grazing of cattle and such lands are not meant to be given away under Darkast either to landless persons or to unauthorised landless occupants. However, if the Statute itself provides for exceptions either in the nature of the reduction of the Gomal land or in the nature of legitimisation of unauthorised occupancy, so long as the unauthorised occupants are termed as landless, the petitioners cannot have valid grievance, though in fact, the cattle are likely to suffer for want of sufficient pasturage. However, if the Statute itself provides for exceptions either in the nature of the reduction of the Gomal land or in the nature of legitimisation of unauthorised occupancy, so long as the unauthorised occupants are termed as landless, the petitioners cannot have valid grievance, though in fact, the cattle are likely to suffer for want of sufficient pasturage. With justifiable sympathy, i am prompted to observe that law has accorded primacy to the articulate needs of the rational animals, the landless; over the inarticulate interests of the dumb animals whose cause goes a begging. 8. According to Ride 97 (4) of the Karnataka Land Revenue rules, 1966, the concerned revenue authorities are competent to reduce the pasturage earmarked for the village cattle and according to the Government Order dated 1st September, 1977, it is open to the authorities (Deputy Commissioners) to legitimise the unauthorised occupancy of landless agriculturists to the extent indicated in the said order. In the light of these provisions, the petitioners do not have any valid ground and much less legal right for grant of a mandamus". Therefore I find that it is only a revengeful attitude of the petitioners in approaching this Court in the guise of the writ petitioner to get over the suit. These writ petitions are liable to be dismissed with exemplary costs as imposed by the Division Bench. I also direct that each petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs. 2,000/- to the Advocates Welfare Fund within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment. A copy of the judgment shall be forwarded to the Bar Council of India to enforce payment if payment is not made. --- *** --- .