M/S Krishna and Company v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Jul 2026WP/17931/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Division Bench (Vibhu Bakhru, CJ and K.S. Hemalekha, J), WP No. 17931 of 2026 (GM-MM-S), decided 13.07.2026 — quarry lease; writ of mandamus; Rule 31ZC Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994; application dated 30.03.2023 (Annexure-C); letter dated 24.11.2025 report vs recommendation (Annexure-F); respondents bound to statement to decide application within 6 weeks; petition disposed without further orders.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed at the preliminary hearing without further orders: the respondents are bound by the Government Advocate's statement that the petitioner's application dated 30.03.2023 under Rule 31ZC will be considered and finally decided within 6 weeks; no mandamus was issued for execution of the quarry lease deed. ¶¶42

M/S Krishna and Company Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:35273-DB WP No. 17931 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 17931 OF 2026 (GM-MM-S)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

M/S. KRISHNA AND COMPANY

¶11

No.9, THAMMANAYANAKANAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT

¶12

BENGALURU- 562 106 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI D. KRISHNA S/O SRI DASAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

¶13

…PETITIONER

¶14

Digitally signed by SRIDEVI S Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

(BY SRI BHAT GANAPATHI NARAYANA, ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VIDHI BENGALURU - 560 001

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:35273-DB WP No. 17931 of 2026

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY KANIJA BHAVAN BENGALURU - 560 001

¶22

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY BENGALURU - 560 001

¶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 WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY APPROPRIATE DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER APPLICATION DATED 30.03.2023, AS PER ANNEXURE-C AND RECOMMENDATION DATED 24.11.2025, FORWARDED BY THE 3^RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2^ND RESPONDENT, AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND EXECUTE THE QUARRY LEASE DEED IN FAVOURED OF THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY WITHIN TIME FRAME PERIOD & ETC.

¶26

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

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:35273-DB WP No. 17931 of 2026

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

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

¶33

The learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.

¶34

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia , praying as under:

¶35

" Issue Writ of Mandamus or any appropriate direction directing the respondents to consider the petitioner application dated 30.03.2023, as per Annexure - C and Recommendation dated 24.11.2025, forwarded by the 3^rd respondent to the 2^nd respondent, as per Annexure - F, and execute the quarry lease deed in favor of the petitioner in respect of the schedule property within time frame period, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶36

➤ Grand such other relief's as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant on the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶37

The learned Government Advocate submits that the letter dated 24.11.2025 which the petitioner mentions as a recommendation is a report and not a recommendation. He states that the petitioner's application dated 30.03.2023 under Rule 31ZC

¶38

¶39

NC: 2026:KHC:35273-DB WP No. 17931 of 2026

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 seeking grant of the quarry lease in respect of 7 acres comprising in Survey No.23, Thammanayakanahalli Village, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District, will be considered and finally decided within a period of 6 weeks.

¶42

In view of the aforesaid statement, no further orders are required to be passed by the respondents, except to state that the respondents shall be bound down to the said statement made on

¶43

their behalf.

¶44

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶45

Sd/(K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

¶46

SD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10

M/S Krishna and Company v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Krishna and Company v. the 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

Smt S Vanaja Rao Vs Smt Jyothi Lakshmi

Deep Raj S Ambat Vs Ravichandra Naik

Sri Dr Sadananda Vs Y G Madhusudan

M/S Skytop Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Beml Employees Cooperative Society Ltd.

Mr. M K Srinivasan Vs Taurus Powertronics Private Limited

Sri Shivappa M Vs State of Karnataka