Disposed

Sri Manchammadevi Stone Crusher and M Sand v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC28 Mar 2024WP/5990/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A stone crusher and M-sand unit challenged a notice requiring it to stop quarrying activities within 20 kms of Krishna Raja Sagara Dam, issued pursuant to an order in another writ petition. The Court held the statutory State Level Dam Safety Committee was already considering the allied-activities issue, declined to entertain the petition, and permitted the petitioner to approach the Committee.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sri Manchammadevi Stone Crusher and M Sand Vs… — Mining and Natural Resources | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:12926-DB WP No. 5990 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.N.V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO. 5990 OF 2024 (GM-MM-S)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SRI MANCHAMMADEVI STONE

¶12

CRUSHER AND M-SAND A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN, ELECHAKANAHALLI, KOTHATHI HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 402 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MR.Y.B. ASHOKGOWDA PATEL

¶13

…PETITIONER

¶14

Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN

¶15

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶16

(BY SRI SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SRI PURNACHANDRA M. PURANIK, ADVOCATE FOR SRI VIKRAM UNII RAJAGOPAL, ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶19

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, (MINES AND GEOLOGY) VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶20

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:12926-DB WP No. 5990 of 2024

¶21

DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶22

KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.

¶23

DISTRICT STONE CRUSHER LICENSING AND REGULATORY AUTHORITY KHANIJA BHAVANA, No.CA4/C, VIVEKANANDANAGAR LAYOUT MANDYA - 571 402 REPRESENTED BY SENIOR GEOLOGIST AND MEMBER SECRETARY

¶24

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA DISTRICT,

¶25

MANDYA – 571 402.

¶26

…RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SRI S.S. MAHENDRA, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 20.01.2024 BEARING No.GABHOOE/HIBHOOVI/ CRUSHER-KAGAGU/2023-24/3531 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT No. 3 (ANNEXURE-A) & ETC.

¶29

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

¶30

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:12926-DB WP No. 5990 of 2024

¶32

ORDER

¶33

Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr.J.Sandesh Chouta assisted by learned advocate Mr.M.Purnachandra Puranik for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate Mr.S.S.Mahendra for the respondents. The Court had also the benefit of assistance of learned Senior Advocate Mr.Aditya Sondhi who acted as Amicus Curiae.

¶34

The petitioner, a partnership firm, has called in question the notice dated 20.01.2024 issued by respondent No.3District Stone Crusher Licensing and Regulatory Authority. A further prayer is made to direct the respondents not to take coercive measures against the petitioner in relation to the operations of the stone crusher and M-sand unit.

¶35

The challenge is advanced to the aforesaid notice raising various grounds. The notice requires the petitioner to temporarily stop quarrying/crusher and other concerned activities within 20 kms. radius of the Krishna Raja Sagara Dam, Mandya District. The notice refers to the order dated 08.01.2024 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:12926-DB WP No. 5990 of 2024

¶38

Writ Petition No.19835 of 2023. In the said order, the Court

¶39

has required to stop the crusher, quarrying and further concerned activities within such radius of the dam.

¶40

3.1 The directions in the said order also quoted in the notice are as under,

¶41

(i) All mining licences/leases comprising any area (whether in private land, government land or otherwise) that lies within a radius of 20 Kms from the periphery of KRS Dam are hereby kept under suspended animation and as a consequence, no mining or allied activities shall be carried on or continued by any person or agency till after a decision is taken by the statutory committee constituted under the provisions of Dam Safety Act, 2021 on the basis of report of study & research, as discussed above.

¶42

(ii) The prohibition of mining or allied activity as directed in the preceding paragraph shall apply to all cases of mining notwithstanding that such activity is being carried on under the orders of this court or of the jurisdictional authority, that were made prior to the date on which the Dam Safety Act, 2021 came into force i.e., 30.12.2021.

¶43

(iii) The Authorities such as, the Officials of Dept. of Mines & Geology, Police Dept., Revenue Dept., etc shall enforce the above directions in letter & spirit and criminal cases be filed against the violators. The violation of the said directions shall also be liable to be treated as the contempt of this court.

¶44

Besides that the notice to the petitioner is to stop the

¶45

quarrying and other activities is based on the aforesaid order,

¶46

learned Amicus Curiae invited attention of the Court to the

¶47

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:12926-DB WP No. 5990 of 2024

¶48

aspect that the State Level Dam Safety Committee has already been constituted and is functional. It is a Committee constituted under Chapter IV of the Dam Safety Act, 2021. Section 11 deals with the Constitution of State Committee on Dam Safety whereas, Section 12 provides for functions of State Committee.

¶49

It was undisputedly stated before the Court that the Committee is seized of the very subject matter and the related aspects. It was further stated that the Committee has been addressing the issue as to whether in addition to the mining and crushing activities, which activities could be said to be falling under the category of ‘allied activities’ which would cause and would have tendency of causing danger to the dam site and the safety of the dam. The very grounds mentioned in the notice are the centripetal issue which the State Level Dam Safety Committee has been considering.

¶50

Learned Government Advocate in support of the notice

¶51

submitted that all activities potent to cause danger to the dam site could be classified as allied activities.

¶52

¶53

NC: 2024:KHC:12926-DB WP No. 5990 of 2024

¶54

It is for the Committee to take a decision on this score.

¶55

In light of all the above, the writ petition is not liable to be entertained. It is open to the petitioner to approach the Committee by way of appropriate application to seek consideration of his case and the grievance in accordance with law.

¶56

The Committee shall take into consideration all the

¶57

aspects including the aspects which may be raised by the petitioner to include the same in the report to be submitted to the State Government.

¶58

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is

¶59

disposed of as not entertained.

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

KPS

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37

Sri Manchammadevi Stone Crusher and M Sand v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sri Manchammadevi Stone Crusher and M Sand v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Gurunath Vadde Vs the State of Karnataka

The Secretary Vs Sri B K Viswantha Reddy

Sri. Sheenappa Vs Sri. Rajneesh Goel

Sri Chennegowda Vs Sri D K Shivakumar

Shri Vijayan R Vs Shri S G Ramachandran

Sri. Narasimha Murthy Vs Mis/Miss Shilpa Baradwaj