Quashed

M/S Shree Venkateshwara Stone Crusher v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Jul 2018WP/14382/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Bench quashed an endorsement rejecting a quarry lease application. The Court held that after the Revisional Authority directed a fresh inspection, the Competent authority could not reject the application based on prior inspection suggestions. The matter is restored for reconsideration within 90 days.

What did the court decide?

The impugned endorsement dated 24.03.2018 is set aside and the matter is restored for reconsideration of the Senior Geologist within 90 days.

M/S Shree Venkateshwara Stone Crusher Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2018)

¶1

W.P.No.14382/2018

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JULY, 2018

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶6

HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNA S. DIXIT

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.14382 OF 2018 (GM-MM-S)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

M/S SHREE VENKATESHWARA STONE CRUSHER PROP: K.S.VENKATESHAPPA, S/O SUBBANNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT KSHETRANAHALLI VILLAGE, NELLAHALLI POST, TYAKAL HOBLI, MALUR TALUKA-563137 KOLAR DISTRICT

¶10

... PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI R.G. KOLLE, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001

¶14

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT., DEPT. OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001

¶15

THE DIRECTOR AND DMG COMMISSIONER KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001

¶16

W.P.No.14382/2018

¶17

¶18

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST & COMPETENT AUTHORITY DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, KOLAR-563102

¶19

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & CHAIRMAN DISTRICT TASK FORCE (MINES) COMMITTEE, KOLAR DISTRICT KOLAR-563101

¶20

THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER O/O DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOLAR DISTRICT KOLAR-563101

¶21

THE GAZATTED ASSISTANT O/O KOLAR DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOLAR-563101

¶22

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS O/O DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOLAR-563101

¶23

THE JOINT DIRECTOR & REVISING AUTHORITY DEPT. OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, SOUTH RANGE, MYSURU-570 023

¶24

... RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, HCGP)

¶26

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH OR SET ASIDE ENDORSEMENT DATED 24.3.2018 ISSUED BY R-4 VIDE ANNEX-A AND THE EARLIER ENDORSEMENT DATED 20.06.2017 / 18.12.2017 ISSUED BY R-4 AT ANNEX-G AS WELL AS THE REVISION ORDER DATED 2.2.2018 ISSUED BY R-9 REVISING AUTHORITY AT REVISION PETITION 104/2017-18 AT ANNEX-H & ETC.

¶28

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE , MADE THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.No.14382/2018

ORDER

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP appearing for the respondents, it appears just and proper to dispose of this petition at this stage itself.

¶33

Shorn of unnecessary details, the relevant aspects of the present matter are that the petitioner had made an application for grant of quarrying lease/licence for quarrying building stone and m-sand over an extent of 3.00 acres of land in survey No.33 at Animitnahalli village, Maluru Taluk, Kolar District, on 19.11.2014. The respondent No.4 issued the endorsement dated 20.06.2017/18.12.2017 rejecting the application made by the petitioner. The petitioner preferred revision application against such endorsement. The Revisional Authority, by the order dated 02.02.2018, directed the authorities concerned to reconsider the application made by the petitioner in accordance with law. On such direction by the Revisional Authority, the endorsement dated 24.03.2018 has been issued, again rejecting the application made by the petitioner.

¶34

W.P.No.14382/2018

¶35

¶36

The Revisional Authority while disapproving the rejection of the application made by the petitioner directed in its order dated 02.02.2018 as under:

¶37

“I, Sri B. Panduranga, Joint Director, Mines and Geology Department, South Range, Mysuru and Revising Authority, in exercise of power conferred on me under Rule 53 (4) of KMMC Rules, 1994 and Govt. Circular No.CI:180 MMN:2006, dated 24.11.2006, keeping in mind the availability of mineral and providing employment and developmental activities of the area in question, the Revision Petition is allowed. Since different opinions have been expressed by Revenue Officials, it is directed to carry out a Joint Inspection of the Quarry Lease applied area afresh meticulously, in terms of Amendment Rules to Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 and Amendment Notification. The Competent Authority is free to take decision in accordance with law, so as to give effect to the Rules in the light of local problems/situation. Hence, Revision Petition No.104/2017-18 is allowed.”

¶38

However, in the impugned endorsement dated 24.03.2018, the Senior Geologist has referred to the submissions of the Assistant Commissioner, Kolar and has again proceeded to reject the application while observing as under:

¶39

“Whereas, the Asst. Commissioner, Kolar stated that a Joint Inspection for the second time has been carried out by the higher Officers over and above his rank and submitted a Report to the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar and hence, there is

¶40

W.P.No.14382/2018

¶41

¶42

no necessity to carry out another Joint Inspection in respect of Quarry Lease applied area individually, since he becomes lower rank officers. Further, as per Letter cited in Reference (2) above, the Joint Inspection carried out by Addl. Deputy Commissioner and his team may be adopted. Hence, a Letter has been directly sent to the Joint Director, Southern Range, Mysuru. In this behalf, the Joint Director, Southern Range, Mysuru was requested to issue directions. Further, the Revising Authority directed to dispose the files in accordance with law as the Senior Geologist himself is the Competent Authority and that the same can be disposed exercising powers vested in him as per Letter cited in Reference (3) above.

¶43

In view of the opinion expressed by the higher Officers, over and above the jurisdictional Asst. Commissioner upon carrying out a spot as per Letter cited in Reference (2) above by the Asst. Commissioner, the Quarry lease Application filed by you is hereby rejected as per Rules 6 (2) of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994.”

¶44

It is difficult to approve the approach of the authority concerned in this matter. Once the Revisional Authority has issued directions for consideration of the application in accordance with law, after carrying out joint inspection afresh, the application could not have been rejected on the suggestions as made, with reference to any previous inspection. It is also not forthcoming, if the authority concerned has duly taken note of the requirements of Rules

¶45

W.P.No.14382/2018

¶46

¶47

and the orders passed by this Court in similar matters so as to deal with the application in accordance with law.

¶48

For what has been observed hereinabove, the impugned endorsement dated 24.03.2018 is set aside and the matter stands restored for reconsideration of the Senior Geologist, Department of Mines and Geology, Kolar District, in accordance with law and at the earliest, preferably within 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶49

The petition stands disposed of.

¶50

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

¶51

Sd/JUDGE

¶52

AHB

M/S Shree Venkateshwara Stone Crusher v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Shree Venkateshwara Stone Crusher v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P Veerabhadra Vs the Deputy Director

Sri Annadurai K Vs the Govt of India

G. Sudhakar Reddy Vs State of Karnataka

M/S. Drn Infrastructure Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri R Manjuanth Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri M G Shivashankraswamy Vs the Senior Geologist