Sri M R Thambi v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Mar 2025WP/12724/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quarry licence; Department of Mines and Geology; Senior Geologist Chikkamagaluru; rejection endorsement dated 08.10.2020; memo dated 26.11.2024; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; writ petition disposed of as not entertained; liberty to challenge endorsement on merits; Karnataka High Court; WP No. 12724 of 2024 (GM-MM_S); N. V. Anjaria CJ; M.I. Arun J.

What did the court decide?

No relief on the prayer; petition disposed of as not entertained, with liberty preserved to the petitioners to challenge the endorsement/order dated 08.10.2020 on merits and in accordance with law. ¶¶40

Sri M R Thambi Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:11098-DB WP No. 12724 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

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

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 12724 OF 2024 (GM-MM_S)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. M.R. THAMBI S/o. LATE M. RAJU AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDENT OF MURUGAN COLONY KADURU TOWN CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 548.

¶9

SMT. A.P.ASHA W/O. T.SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDENT OF VENKATESHWARA NAGAR KALGUNDI, KADURU TOWN CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 548.

¶10

Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SRI. D.BALASUBRAMANYAM S/O. DORESWAMY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDENT OF MALLIDEVIHALLI VILLAGE KADURU TOWN

¶12

CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 548.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. N.R. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT (MSME AND MINES)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:11098-DB WP No. 12724 of 2024

¶19

VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALURU-560 001.

¶20

THE JOINT DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY NO.CA-4, 1^ST 'D' CROSS, 'I' BLOCK RAMAKRISHNAGAR MYSORE-570 022.

¶21

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY OFFICE OF THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST OFFICE OF THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST CHIKKAMAGALURU-577 101.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; AS PER ORDER DATED 02.05.2024, NOTICE TO OTHER RESPONDENTS IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE 3^RD RESPONDENT TO GRANT QUARRY LICENSE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE APPLICATIONS MADE BY THE PETITIONERS WHICH ARE PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D TO G TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and

¶27

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶28

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:11098-DB WP No. 12724 of 2024

¶30

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶31

(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)

¶32

The only prayer which could be pointed out by learned advocate for the petitioners and exists in the pleadings in this petition is for directing respondent No.3– the Senior Geologist, Chikkamagaluru to grant quarry licences in respect of the respective applications made by the petitioners.

¶33

Today when the petition came up for consideration, learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Niloufer Akbar invited the attention of the court to the memo dated 26.11.2024 filed on behalf of the respondent-authorities along with which, the endorsement dated 08.10.2020 is also produced.

¶34

It is stated in the said endorsement that respondent No.3, after considering the applications of the petitioners, they have been rejected.

¶35

Since the applications of the petitioners have been considered and rejected by the aforementioned endorsement

¶36

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:11098-DB WP No. 12724 of 2024

¶38

dated 08.10.2020, no further adjudication survives in the

¶39

present petition.

¶40

The petition is accordingly disposed of as not entertained.

¶41

It is clarified that the disposal of the petition will not preclude the petitioners to challenge the aforesaid endorsement/order, if advised, to be considered strictly on merits and in accordance with law.

¶42

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶43

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶44

VMB

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46

Sri M R Thambi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri M R Thambi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs Kiran Suri Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Raghunatha Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Vijaybharat Bhojappa Ballari Vs the Secretary to Government

Sri Kapil Vs Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Muralidhar K T Vs Dr Kumar

Sri M R Thambi Vs State of Karnataka