ORDER : 1. The petitioners are before this Court in a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging Annexure-E dated 19.03.1994 in M.R. No.15/1993-94, vide LND:CR 16/1993-1994, by which five acres of gomal land in Sy.No.29 is set apart for “Ashraya Scheme” and for a mandamus to consider the representations Annexures-G1 to G3. 2. It is submitted that the petitioners are permanent residents of Kyathanahalli Village in Davanagere Taluk. It is further submitted that there are more than 700 cattles in Kyathanahalli Village. In the said village 27 acres of land in Sy.No.29/P1 and 26.04 acres of land in Sy.No.47 is reserved for cattle grazing. Out of the said gomal land, 5 acres has been set apart for formation of house sites under “Ashraya Scheme”. On coming to know that the gomal land is being reserved for formation of house sites under “Ashraya Scheme”, the petitioners made representations to respondents 2, 3 and 4 to cancel the reservation of land for formation of sites under “Ashraya Scheme”. As the reservation of 5 acres of gomal land for “Ashraya Scheme” is illegal so also the inaction on the part of the respondents in not considering the petitioners’ representations, they are before this Court. 3. The counsel for the petitioners contended that out of total 53 acres of gomal land, 5 acres of land is set apart for formation of house sites under “Ashraya Scheme”, contrary to Rule 97(1) of Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’). Further, it is submitted that respondents have no authority to reduce the extent of the land reserved for grazing of cattle. 4. We have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the Counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the writ petition records. We are of the view, that this writ petition would not espouse public cause and does not merit consideration. 5. Section 71 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, reads as follows :- “Section 71: Lands may be assigned for special purposes and when assigned, shall not be otherwise used without sanction of the Deputy Commissioner. We are of the view, that this writ petition would not espouse public cause and does not merit consideration. 5. Section 71 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, reads as follows :- “Section 71: Lands may be assigned for special purposes and when assigned, shall not be otherwise used without sanction of the Deputy Commissioner. Subject to the general orders of the State Government, Survey Officers, whilst survey operations are proceeding under this Act, and at any other time, the Deputy Commissioner, may set apart lands, which are the property of the State Government and not in the lawful occupation of any person or aggregate of persons in any village or portions of a village, for free pasturage for the village cattle, for forest reveres or for any other public purpose; and lands assigned specially for any such purpose shall not be otherwise used without the sanction of the Deputy Commissioner; and in the disposal of lands under Section 79 due regard shall be had to all such special assignments.” 6. The above provision would empower the Deputy Commissioner to set apart Government lands for free pasturage of the village cattle. 7. Rule 97 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, reads as follows : - “Rule 97. Providing free pasturage.-(1) Government land shall be set apart for free pasturage for the cattle of each village at the rate of twelve hectares for every hundred heads of cattle. Explanation.-In calculating the heads of cattle or goats, sheep or calves or cow or buffalo shall be taken as equivalent to one head of cattle. (2) If there is sufficient forest area in the village concerned or in the adjoining village to enable the village cattle to graze, the area to be set apart as free pasturage may be reduced correspondingly. (3) If there is no grazing land available in a village, or the land available falls short of the extent prescribed under sub-rule (1) the deficit may be made up by setting apart Government land available in the adjacent village. (4) The Deputy Commissioner shall determine the extent of land necessary to be set apart for free pasturage in any village. If in the opinion of the Deputy Commissioner the extent of pasturage should exceed the minimum prescribed in sub-rule (1) he may so set apart such larger extent as may be necessary. (4) The Deputy Commissioner shall determine the extent of land necessary to be set apart for free pasturage in any village. If in the opinion of the Deputy Commissioner the extent of pasturage should exceed the minimum prescribed in sub-rule (1) he may so set apart such larger extent as may be necessary. If on the contrary he considers that the area already so set apart is much larger than what is really required, he may reduce it to the prescribed minimum. Where, he considers that the extent of free pasturage may be reduced below the prescribed limit, he should do so only after obtaining the prior permission of the Divisional Commissioner: Provided that no such permission shall be necessary where the reduction below the prescribed limit is for the purpose of,- (i) distribution of house sites to the sightless person; and (ii) grant of land to persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, for agricultural purposes, who are ordinarily residents of such village. (iii) regularisation of unauthorised cultivation under Chapter XIII-A.” 8. Reading of the above provision makes it clear that the Deputy Commissioner is empowered to reduce or increase the land for free pasturage in any village depending upon the necessity and on compliance of the conditions prescribed therein. This Court on consideration of the above provisions, while considering the case where gomal land was reduced and allotted for construction of Super Specialty Hospital, in W.P.No.14857/2018 disposed of on 28.06.2018, has held as follows : “In the face of the provisions aforementioned, it cannot be said that if a parcel of land is set apart for cattle grazing the extent thereof could never be reduced. It needs hardly any emphasis that in multifaceted and myriad public welfare activities, several of the requirements need to be balanced by the authorities in an appropriate manner. Even when the necessity of cattle grazing land in the context of a village settlement cannot be gainsaid, the requirements of medical and health care facilities are also of unquestionable necessity and significance. It is not open for the petitioners to contend that the requirements of cattle grazing override the requirements of appropriate health care facilities.” 9. In the case on hand also, the Deputy Commissioner has set apart 5 acres of gomal land for formation of house sites under “Ashraya Scheme” to allot sites to the siteless persons. It is not open for the petitioners to contend that the requirements of cattle grazing override the requirements of appropriate health care facilities.” 9. In the case on hand also, the Deputy Commissioner has set apart 5 acres of gomal land for formation of house sites under “Ashraya Scheme” to allot sites to the siteless persons. Providing housing sites, is also a public purpose and reduction of 5 acres of gomal land from out of gomal land of 53 acres in Sy.No.29/P1 and Sy.No.47 of Kyathanahalli Village, Davanagere Taluk, cannot be called as either unreasonable nor unauthorized, in view of the above extracted provisions. 10. The Deputy Commissioner is right in allotting 5 acres of gomal land for formation of sites under “Ashraya Scheme” which provides shelter to the homeless persons. Moreover, the petitioners, who claim to have filed this writ petition under public interest have approached this Court in the year 2017, whereas 5 acres of gomal land is set apart for formation of house sites under “Ashraya Scheme”, by order dated 19.03.1994, more than 20 years back. Under the impugned order as the lands are set apart for public requirement i.e., formation of house sites under “Ashraya Scheme” which is a necessity for providing sites to houseless persons in the village, we are of the view, that no case for interference is made out. 11. Writ petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.