Disposed

Kamadenu Stone Crushers v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Nov 2023WP/14626/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed withdrawal of a writ petition challenging a rejection order, permitting the petitioner to approach the Revisional Authority with renewed contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the Revisional Authority; delay to be considered leniently; contentions kept open; costs made easy.

Kamadenu Stone Crushers Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:41587-DB WP No. 14626 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 14626 OF 2022 (GM-MM_S)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

KAMADENU STONE CRUSHERS, NO.193, 5^TH CROSS, IST MAIN, MANJAPPA BLOCK, DINNURU , R T NAGAR, BENGALURU -560 032, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI CHETHAN K S, S/O LATE K N SURENDRA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI.MANJUNATH HEGDE FOR SRI. T SESHAGIRI RAO., ADVOCATES)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU -560 001.

¶15

THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU -560 001.

¶16

THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY,

¶17

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:41587-DB WP No. 14626 of 2022

¶18

KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU -560 001.

¶19

THE DISTRICT TASK FORCE (MINES) COMMITTEE, HEADED BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, AS ITS CHAIRMAN, O/O THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU -560 001.

¶20

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, DEPT. MINES AND GEOLOGY, NO.219, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, BEERASANDRA VILLAGE, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU -562110.

¶21

M/S N K ENTERPRISES, PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN, KALLUGOPANAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562109, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. CHANNIGARAYAPPA, S/O LATE NANJUNDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI.S.S.MAHENDRA, PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5)

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED REJECTION ORDER DATED 31/01/2022 ONE PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5 IN CASE NO.DMG/DD.BRD/SQL.A.NO.-102/2013-14/2021-22/3476, FOUND AT ANNEXURE-L TO THE WRIT PETITION.

¶25

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:41587-DB WP No. 14626 of 2022

¶26

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

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on instructions prays for leave to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to approach the Revisional Authority by filing appropriate Revision. It is further submitted that on the bonafide belief the petitioner was before this court, in writ jurisdiction.

¶29

Considering his submission, we direct the Revisional Authority that in case the Revision is filed by the petitioner, the aspect of delay be considered leniently on the backdrop of the fact that he was before this court prosecuting the Writ Petition in bonafide belief.

¶30

With these observations, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the

¶31

¶32

NC: 2023:KHC:41587-DB WP No. 14626 of 2022

¶33

Revisional Authority in accordance with law and in that

¶34

connection all contentions are kept open.

Costs made easy.

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/JUDGE

CBC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

Kamadenu Stone Crushers v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamadenu Stone Crushers v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Nagaraju C Vs Doddaballapura Taluk Vakeelara Sangha (R)

Sri S Gopala Vs Smt Naium Unnissa

Smt K H Bhagyavathamma Vs Sri Madhusudhan C

Sri. D Rangaswamy Vs Smt. R Veena

Eca Hotels and Investments Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Smt.Gowramma

Sri Vijaya Ganapathi Vs M/S Intuit Technology Services Private Ltd.