Allowed

Sri. Rekhappa L Rathod v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC21 Mar 2022WP/1499/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This short order dealt with a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging notices and endorsements issued by the Department of Mines and Geology. The Additional Government Advocate conceded that the impugned orders violated natural justice by being passed without an opportunity of hearing. The Court quickly agreed and quashed the notices in interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

The impugned notice dated 01.07.2021, endorsement dated 09.08.2021, and second notice dated 25.08.2021 along with respective annexures are quashed.

Sri. Rekhappa L Rathod Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2022

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO.1499 OF 2022 (GM-MMS)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. REKHAPPA L. RATHOD AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS LAKSHMINAGARA GOREBALA ROAD ILAKAL

¶11

... PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI D.L.N.RAO, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI ANIRUDH ANAND, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001.

¶15

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY DISTRICT SANKEERNA BUILDING GROUND FLOOR, HOSPET ROAD KOPPAL-583 231.

¶16

DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001.

¶17

... RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA)

¶19

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER

¶21

¶22

APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING OF THE NOTICE BEARING NO. MLD.KKR.NOTICE.2021-22/1270 DATED 01.07.2021 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.

¶23

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the

¶26

following reliefs:

¶27

a) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or Order quashing of notice bearing No.MLD:KKR:Notice:202122/1270 dated 01.07.2021 issued by the Second Respondent vide Annexure-“F”, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶28

b) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or Order quashing endorsement bearing No.MGD:KMD:SQL: 2021-22/1845 dated 09.08.2021 issued by the Second Respondent vide Annexure-“K”, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶29

c) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or Order quashing the endorsement (Second Notice) bearing No.MGD:KMD:NOTIC:2021-22/2050 dated 25.08.2021 issued by the Second Respondent vide Annexure-“L”, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶30

d) Issue such other relief or reliefs that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶31

¶32

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶33

Learned Additional Government Advocate on instructions fairly concedes that the impugned order has been passed without affording any opportunity to the petitioner, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and that accordingly, the impugned notice at Annexure-F dated 01.07.2021 as well as the consequent endorsement at Annexure-K dated 09.08.2021 and the second notice dated 25.08.2021 vide Annexure-L are vitiated and deserve to be quashed.

¶34

The aforesaid submission of learned Additional Government Advocate is placed on record.

¶35

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER

¶36

I. The petition is hereby allowed .

¶37

II. The impugned notice at Annexure-F dated 01.07.2021, the impugned endorsement at Annexure-K dated 09.08.2021 and the

¶38

¶39

impugned second notice dated 25.08.2021 vide Annexure-L are hereby quashed.

¶40

III. Liberty is reserved in favour of the respondents to take appropriate steps and pass fresh order in accordance with law.

¶41

SD/CHIEF JUSTICE

¶42

SD/JUDGE

¶43

BMC

Sri. Rekhappa L Rathod v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Rekhappa L Rathod 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mullur Solar Parks Private Limited Vs Automotive Axles Limited

Sri.M.N.Venugopal Vs State of Karnataka

Dr. Kb Vijayakumar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Rekhappa L Rathod Vs State of Karnataka

Murali Krishna Brahmandam Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Chandan K L Vs Union of India