Dismissed¶6

Sri. M. Dinesh v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Nov 2025WP/27671/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quarry lease; Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994; Rule 15A minimum extent; Schedule II-A two acres building stone; Rule 8(B) amendment; revival/resurrection of 03.02.2009 application rejected 16.11.2016; NOCs not on record; proviso exception not established; letter dated 16.01.2024 no further orders; writ of certiorari under Articles 226/227 dismissed; Chitradurga, Holalakere, Marapura, Survey No.13; Deputy Director, Mines and Geology; Coram: CJ Vibhu Bakhru and C.M. Poonacha J; decided 19.11.2025; NC 2025:KHC:47560-DB.

What did the court decide?

No infirmity exists in the impugned order dated 12.01.2024. ¶5

Sri. M. Dinesh Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:47560-DB WP No. 27671 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 27671 OF 2025 (GM-MM-S)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI M. DINESH S/O. LATE G.A. MARAPPA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/AT. KALAGHATTA VADDARAHATTI VILLAGE KALAGHATTA POST HOLALAKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 518

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI BHAT GANAPATHY NARAYAN, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by SRIDEVI S Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶16

VIDHANA SOUDHA

¶17

DR. B.R. AMEEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY

¶18

THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROADS BENGALURU - 560 001

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:47560-DB WP No. 27671 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY CHITRADURCA TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 501

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY APPROPRIATE ORDER OR DIRECTION BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.01.2024, BEARING Sl. No. GA.BHU.EI/U.NI.CHI/ KA.GA.GHU.A/ 81/201617/2023-24/3489-90, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT No.3, AS PER ANNEXURE-F & ETC.

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶30

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying

¶31

that the impugned order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the respondent No.3, whereby the application preferred by the petitioner's father (since deceased) for grant of a quarry lease in respect of building stone, was once again rejected.

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:47560-DB WP No. 27671 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

The petitioner's father had made an application on 03.02.2009, for grant of a quarry lease in respect of land measuring one acre falling in Survey No.13, located at Marapura Village, Holalakere Taluk, Chittadurga District (subject land). The record does not indicate that any NOCs were issued by the concerned authorities at the material time. However, the said application came to be rejected by an order dated 16.11.2016 on the ground that Rule 8 (B) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 [ Rules ], had been amended and the said application was rendered ineligible. There is no material on record to indicate that the petitioner's father had pursued the said application prior to its rejection on 16.11.2016.

¶35

The petitioner filed an application seeking to resurrect the said application. However, the same was dismissed by an order dated 12.01.2024, which is impugned in the present petition.

¶36

A plain reading of the impugned order indicates that the application was rejected on the ground that the applied area was less than two acres and in terms of Rule 15A of the Rules, no quarry lease or licence could be granted with an extent less than

¶37

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:47560-DB WP No. 27671 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

the minimum extent as specified in Schedule II-A, which stipulates a minimum area of two acres for grant of quarry lease in respect to building stones. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a letter dated 16.01.2024 to the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology, Chitradurga, enclosing therewith certain documents for verification. No further orders or action were required to be passed or taken in respect to the petitioner's letter dated 16.01.2024, as the application stood rejected.

¶40

We find no infirmity with the impugned order dated 12.01.2024. Rule 15-A of the said Rules is unambiguous and proscribes grant of quarry lease in respect of an area less than the area that is stipulated under the Rules. There is also no material on record to indicate that the petitioner's application falls within the exception of the proviso to Rule 15A of the Rules.

¶41

In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed.

¶42

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶43

Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

¶44

SD, List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11

Sri. M. Dinesh v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. M. Dinesh v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B K Shivakumar Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Mr. Doddaputtaiah Vs State of Karnataka

Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport Corporation Vs Luman Industries Limited

Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited Vs Ultratech Cement Limited

Subashchandra Modi Vs Sri Tushar Girinath

Plutus Research Private Limited Vs Aashaya Harlalka