Allowed

Sri. Sharath Kumar v. R v State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC16 Jul 2018WP/9725/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposed of three writ petitions challenging rejections of quarry lease applications. The High Court disapproved impugned endorsements and ordered authorities to submit views and reports within two weeks, directing final decisions on lease execution within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Impugned endorsements disapproved; authorities directed to submit views/reports within two weeks and decide lease execution within four weeks.

Sri. Sharath Kumar v R Vs State of Karnataka — Mining and Natural Resources | Karnataka HC (2018)

¶1

W.P.No.26086/2018 and other matters

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JULY, 2018

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R.DEVDAS

¶8

WRIT PETITION NOS.26086/2018, 28433/2018

¶9

AND 9725/2017 (GM-MM-S)

¶10

IN W.P.NO.26086/2018

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

FRANCIES GEORGE S/O C.M.VERKY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, JOY ESTATE, HENGAVALLI VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT.

¶13

... PETITIONER

¶14

(BY SRI RAMESHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶17

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST (MINERAL) DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY AC OFFICE BUILDING, 2^ND FLOOR, SHIVAMOGGA – 577 201.

¶18

THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶19

W.P.No.26086/2018 and other matters

¶20

¶21

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHVAMOGGA DISTRICT, SHIVAMOGGA – 577 201.

¶22

... RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI V.G.BHANUPRAKASH, AGA)

¶24

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A, DATE; 29.09.2016 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 & ETC.

¶26

IN W.P. NO. 28433/2018

¶27

BETWEEN:

¶28

K. JAYA RAMAN S/O G. KUPPUSWAMY NAIDU AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT 11/100, 7^TH CROSS, S.B.M.COLONY, BRINDAVAN NAGAR, MATHIKERE BENGALURU - 560 054.

¶29

... PETITIONER

¶30

(BY SRI R.G. KOLLE, ADVOCATE)

¶31

AND:

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVAN

¶35

W.P.No.26086/2018 and other matters

¶36

¶37

RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶38

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST (MINES) & COMPETENT AUTHORITY DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562 101.

¶39

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT TASK FORCE (MINES) COMMITTEE, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562 101.

¶40

... RESPONDENTS

¶41

(BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, HCGP)

¶42

¶43

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE 4^TH RESPONDENT SENIOR GEOLOGIST TO GRANT & EXECUTE A QUARRY LEASE TO EXTRACT ORDINARY BUILDING STONES, WHICH IS A NON SPECIFIED MINOR MINERAL, OVER AN AREA OF 4.20 ACRES IN GOVT. LAND BEARING SY.NO.16 OF GAGAREKALUVE VILLAGE IN CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUKA & DISTRICT AS PER QUARRY LEASE APPLICATION DATED 01.02.2016 FILED BY THIS PETITIONER PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B BY QUASHING OR SETTING ASIDE THE REJECTION ORDER DATED 25.04.2018 PASSED BY THE 4^TH RESPONDENT SENIOR GEOLOGIST PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶44

IN W.P. NO. 9725/2017

¶45

BETWEEN:

¶46

SRI. SHARATH KUMAR V.R. AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

¶47

W.P.No.26086/2018 and other matters

¶48

¶49

S/O SRI RAMAKRISHNE GOWDA R/A VARAHASANDRA DADAGA POST BINDIGA NAVILE HOBLI NAGAMANGALA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571401

¶50

... PETITIONER

¶51

(BY MS. RAKSHITHA D.J., ADVOCATE FOR SRI MADANGOUDA N. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶52

AND:

¶53

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE M.S. BUILDING BANGALORE – 560 001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY

¶54

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

¶55

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY NO.2652/2667, RAILWAY STATION ROAD GANDHINAGAR TUMKUR – 572 102

¶56

... RESPONDENTS

¶57

(BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, HCGP)

¶58

¶59

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DTD.29.11.2016 / 12.12.2016 ISSUED BY THE R-3 VIDE ANNEX-Q TO THE W.P. AND ALSO QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DTD.21.9.2016 ISSUED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNEX-R TO THE W.P. AND ETC.

¶60

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

¶61

W.P.No.26086/2018 and other matters

¶62

¶63

ORDER

¶64

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.

¶65

The learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.26086/2018 has moved a memo that he is not pressing on the challenge to the validity of Rule 8B of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2016.

¶66

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:

¶67

“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

¶68

W.P.No.26086/2018 and other matters

¶69

¶70

learned Additional Government Advocate as under:-

¶71

“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 received by the Competent Authority before 16.06.2015.”

¶72

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:

¶73

“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.

¶74

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.

¶75

No costs.”

¶76

The proposition aforesaid, for all practical purposes, apply to these cases too. This Court has repeatedly observed that it

¶77

W.P.No.26086/2018 and other matters

¶78

¶79

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.

¶80

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.

¶81

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.

¶82

No costs.”

¶83

The position aforesaid applies to the present cases too.

¶84

Accordingly, these writ petitions are also disposed of at 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.

¶85

W.P.No.26086/2018 and other matters

¶86

¶87

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. Sharath Kumar v. R v State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Sharath Kumar v. R 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sree Veerabhadrreshwara Swamy Andale Grama Vs the State of Karnataka Represented by

K v Sudhakara Gupta Vs K G Pattabhi Ram

Raichur Vikasa Parishad Vs State of Karnataka

The State of Karnataka Vs Smt Suguna