Allowed

Sri. K H Manjunatha v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Dec 2018WP/47911/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Common Order five writ petitions challenging endorsements rejecting mining lease applications. Relying on precedents, the Court quashed endorsements issued based on pre-amendment applications but rejected due to alleged deficiencies. Applicants remain eligible if received before the statutory cutoff, with authorities required to consider applications afresh.

What did the court decide?

Disapproved impugned endorsements; directed authorities to consider applications and execute lease deeds within four weeks.

Sri. K H Manjunatha Vs State of Karnataka — Mining and Natural Resources | Karnataka HC (2018)

¶1

W.P.Nos.47911-47914/2018 and other cases

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018 PRESENT

¶5

HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

¶8

WRIT PETITION NOS.47911-47914/2018, 47915-47917/2018,

¶9

50471/2018 AND 53059/2018 (GM-MM-S)

¶10

W.P.Nos.47911-47914/2018

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

SRI.K.H.MANJUNATHA

¶13

S/O SRI HANUMANNA

¶14

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

¶15

R/AT VENKATESHWARA NAGARA

¶16

KADURU TOWN & TALUK

¶17

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

¶18

SRI.M.R.BABU S/O LATE M.RAJU

¶19

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

¶20

R/AT H.D.DEVEGOWDA BADAVANAE V.B.ROAD, KADURU TOWN & TALUK

¶21

CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT

¶22

SRI. K. ARUN S/O LATE KANNAPPA

¶23

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

¶24

R/AT VENKATESHWARA NAGARA KADURU TOWN & TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

¶25

SRI. K.RAJU

¶26

S/O LATE KANNAPPA

¶27

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

¶28

R/AT VENKATESHWARA NAGARA

¶29

KADURU TOWN & TALUK

¶30

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577 508

¶31

... PETITIONERS

¶32

(BY SRI NAIK N.R., ADVOCATE)

¶33

W.P.Nos.47911-47914/2018 and other cases

¶34

¶35

AND:

¶36

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶37

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶38

COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES

¶39

DEPARTMENT (MSME AND MINES) VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALURU – 560 001

¶40

DIRECTOR/COMMISSIONER

¶41

DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001

¶42

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY OFFICE OF THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST CHIKKAMAGALURU – 577 101

¶43

... RESPONDENTS

¶44

(BY SRI V.G.BHANUPRAKASH, AGA)

¶45

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENTS DATED 26.10.2016, 26.10.2016, 22.03.2016 AND 26.10.2016 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 I.E. ANNEXURE-A1 TO A3 AS BEING VIOLATED OF ARTICLE 14 AND 19 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ETC.

¶46

W.P.Nos.47915-47917/2018

¶47

BETWEEN:

¶48

SMT.A.P.ASHA

¶49

W/O SRI T.SRINIVASA

¶50

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

¶51

R/AT VENKATESHWARA NAGARA

¶52

KADURU TOWN & TALUK

¶53

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

¶54

SRI.D.SUBRAMANYAM

¶55

S/O SRI.DORESWAMY

¶56

AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS

¶57

R/AT H.D.DEVEGOWDA BADAVANAE KADURU TOWN & TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT

¶58

SRI. K. RAJU

¶59

S/O LATE KANNAPPA

¶60

W.P.Nos.47911-47914/2018 and other cases

¶61

¶62

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT VENKATESHWARA NAGARA KADURU TOWN & TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577 548

¶63

... PETITIONERS

¶64

(BY SRI NAIK N.R., ADVOCATE)

¶65

AND:

¶66

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶67

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶68

COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT (MSME AND MINES) VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALURU – 560 001

¶69

DIRECTOR/COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001

¶70

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY OFFICE OF THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST CHIKKAMAGALURU – 577 101

¶71

... RESPONDENTS

¶72

(BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, HCGP)

¶73

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENTS DATED 26.10.2016, 08.02.2016/19.02.2016, 08.07.2014/16.07.2014 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 I.E. ANNEXURE-A1 TO A3 AS BEING VIOLATED OF ARTICLE 14 AND 19 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ETC.

¶74

W.P.No.50471/2018

¶75

BETWEEN:

¶76

SRI.M.V.BASAVARAJ AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS S/O VENKATASWAMY R/AT NO.10, 3^RD CROSS VIVEKANANDANAGAR RAMANAGAR – 562 127 ... PETITIONER

¶77

(BY SRI PRAKASH B.S., ADVOCATE)

¶78

W.P.Nos.47911-47914/2018 and other cases

¶79

¶80

AND:

¶81

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT (MSME & MINES) VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE – 560 001

¶82

THE DIRECTOR / COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVANA, R.C.ROAD BANGALORE – 560 001

¶83

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & DISTRICT OFFICES COMPLEX SIDLAGHATTA ROAD CHIKKABALLAPURA – 562 101

¶84

... RESPONDENTS

¶85

(BY SRI V.G.BHANUPRAKASH, AGA)

¶86

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 23.06.2017 ISSUED BY THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY, CHIKKABALLAPUR. COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 23.06.2017 HAS BEEN PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶87

W.P.No.53059/2018

¶88

BETWEEN:

¶89

SRI. MOHAMMED AMJED PASHA S/O M.S.PASHA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS NO.21/6, GUNDAPPA BLOCK PEMMAGOWDA ROAD J.C.NAGARA BANGALORE – 560 006 (BY SRI ANJANEYA, ADVOCATE)

¶90

... PETITIONER

¶91

W.P.Nos.47911-47914/2018 and other cases

¶92

¶93

AND:

¶94

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY

¶95

(MINES, SSI & TEXTILES)

¶96

COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001

¶97

THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE – 560 001

¶98

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY ROOM NO.S.A.10, 2^ND FLOOR DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE PATRENAHALLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA – 562 127

¶99

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE PATRENAHALLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA – 562 127

¶100

THE DISTRICT TASK FORCE REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

¶101

DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT CHIKKABALLAPURA – 562 127

¶102

... RESPONDENTS

¶103

(BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, HCGP)

¶104

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 01.09.2017 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.3 TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 19.12.2013 AS PER ANNEXURE-A OF WRIT PETITION AND TO GRANT LICENSE AND TO EXECUTE THE MINING LEASE TO THE EXTENT OF 03 ACRES IN SY.NO.145 SITUATED AT GUVVALAKAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK AND DISTRICT FORTHWITH AND ETC.

¶105

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

¶106

W.P.Nos.47911-47914/2018 and other cases

¶107

¶108

ORDER

¶109

These petitions involving similar and akin issues have been considered together and are taken up for final disposal at this stage itself by way of this common order.

¶110

It is not in dispute that several similar nature writ petitions have been considered and allowed by this Court, either while disapproving the similar endorsements and restoring the applications for reconsideration or while requiring the pending applications to be considered in accordance with law, including a batch of writ petitions led by W.P.No.43235/2017, decided on 11.04.2018, wherein this Court has, inter alia , observed as under:

¶111

“In the order dated 24.10.2017 in W.P.No.44260/2017, this Court has taken note of the provisions contained in the amended Rule 8-B of the Rules and has also taken note of the candid submissions of the learned Additional Government Advocate as under:-

¶112

“5. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that this Court in Writ Petition No.25421/2017 (DD 04.07.2017) and in several other matters has held that applications as that of the petitioner do not become ineligible if the application was received by the Competent Authority before 16.06.2015 and further, it is held that it is the responsibility of the Competent Authority to consult the authorities referred to in Rule 8(5) of the Rules and to obtain the certificates and reports referred to therein. He further submits that the application of the petitioner was

¶113

W.P.Nos.47911-47914/2018 and other cases

¶114

¶115

received by the Competent Authority before 16.06.2015.”

¶116

This Court has also considered the earlier orders passed in the matters and has allowed W.P.No.60155/2016 by the order dated 22.03.2018, while observing as under:

¶117

“Having regard to the submissions made, this petition stands disposed of at this stage itself, while requiring that the concerned authorities shall send their views/opinions to the authorities of the Mines and Geology Department within two weeks from today.

¶118

The authorities concerned shall consider and finally decide on the prayer of the writ petitioner for execution of the lease deed within four weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.

¶119

No costs.”

¶120

The proposition aforesaid, for all practical purposes, apply to these cases too. This Court has repeatedly observed that it was the responsibility of the concerned authority/authorities to obtain the clearances and technical reports; and for their omissions, the applications could not have been rejected. We find no reason to take any different view of the matter.

¶121

Accordingly, all these petitions stand disposed of at this stage itself, while requiring that the concerned authorities shall send their views/opinions/reports to the authorities of Mines and Geology Department within two weeks from today.

¶122

The authorities concerned shall consider and finally decide on the prayer of the writ petitioners for execution of the lease deeds within four weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.

¶123

No costs.”

¶124

W.P.Nos.47911-47914/2018 and other cases

¶125

¶126

The position aforesaid applies to the present cases too.

¶127

Accordingly, these writ petitions are also disposed of at

¶128

this stage itself while disapproving the impugned endorsements, if made in rejection of the application of the writ petitioner/s and with the requirement that the authorities concerned shall send their views/opinions/reports to the authorities of Mines and Geology Department within two weeks from today.

¶129

The authorities concerned shall consider and finally decide on the prayer of the writ petitioners for execution of the lease deed within four weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.

No costs.

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/JUDGE

AHB

Sri. K H Manjunatha v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. K H Manjunatha 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

H K Lakshmane Gowda Vs Senior Geologist

H K Lakshmane Gowda Vs Senior Geologist

H.K.Lakshmane Gowda Vs Senior Geologist

Gousemohdin Doddamani Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Usharani Vs State of Karnataka

Udupi Jilla Hoigedjoni Karmikara Sangha Vs State of Karnataka