M/S Gmm Enterprises Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

M/S Gmm Enterprises Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; petition disposed of with respondents bound down to the statement that the impugned notice may be treated as a show cause notice, the petitioner being at liberty to reply within 4 weeks and the authorities to pass an order after affording a hearing; merits of the demand not examined and all rights and contentions reserved.

Issue for consideration

Whether the demand notice dated 15.05.2026 was liable to be set aside on the ground that it was issued without affording the petitioner any opportunity to be heard, in violation of principles of natural justice. +1 more

Court's answer

The impugned demand notice may be construed as a show cause notice, and the petitioner is at liberty to respond to the same within a period of 4 weeks from date.

Ratio / Principle

The concerned authorities shall consider the petitioner's response and pass an order after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.

Key takeaways

In view of the Additional Government Advocate's statement, no orders are required to be passed in the petition, except that the respondents stand bound down to the statement made on their behalf.ratio¶51
The Court expressly clarified that it has not examined the merits of the demand and nothing stated in the order should be construed as such.obiter¶51
All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved, including the petitioner's contention that the one time settlement (OTS) under Rule 44-A of the KMMC Rules is voluntary and at the option of the lease/licence holder.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

M/s GMM Enterprises v. State of Karnataka (WP No. 21514 of 2026, GM-MM-S; decided 20.07.2026, coram: Vibhu Bakhru, CJ and K.S. Hemalekha, J): Writ petition under Articles 226/227 against demand notice dated 15.05.2026 (Annexure-A) issued by the Senior Geologist, Dept. of Mines & Geology, Davanagere under Rule 44-A of the Karnataka Minor Minerals Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2026 / Rule 44A of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994, demanding Rs.1,03,05,680/- as fine for excess extraction by way of One Time Settlement (OTS) with penal consequences. Grievance: notice issued without opportunity of hearing, violating natural justice. On the AGA's statement that the notice may be construed as a show cause notice, the Court disposed of the petition without passing orders: petitioner free to respond within 4 weeks; authorities to consider the reply and pass an order after hearing; respondents bound to the statement; merits of the demand expressly not examined; all contentions reserved, including that OTS under Rule 44-A is voluntary and at the option of the lease/licence holder.

1 -

HC-KAR

NC: 2026:KHC:37009-DB WP No. 21514 of 2026

CNR: KAHC010479602026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 21514 OF 2026 (GM-MM-S)

BETWEEN:

M/S GMM ENTERPRISES

A PARTNERSHIP FORMED VIDE A PARTNERSHIP DEED REG.OFF. #3368/1 SHAMANUR ROAD LAKSHMI FLOUR MILL LAKSHMI FLOUR MILLS PREMISES

DAVANAGERE - 577 004.

Digitally signed by SRIDEVI S Location: High Court of Karnataka

REP. BY ITS OWNER S.S. GANESH

(BY MS. DEEKSHA N AMRUTHESH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI AMRUTHESH N P, ADVOCATE)

…PETITIONER

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPT. OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES VIKASA SOUSHA

DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY

2 -

HC-KAR

NC: 2026:KHC:37009-DB WP No. 21514 of 2026

CNR: KAHC010479602026

THE DIRECTOR DEPT. OF MINES & GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001

THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPT. OF MINES & GEOLOGY VIDYANAGAR DAVANAGERE - 577 005

…RESPONDENTS

(BY MS. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING OF ANNEXURE-A, THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 15.05.2026 BEARING NO.GaBhuE-HiBhuDa:OTSNotice-2026-27/280 ISSUED BY THE 3^RD RESPONDENT SENIOR GEOLOGIST OF DEPT. MINES AND GEOLOGY, DAVANAGERE, DEMANDING RS.1,03,05,680/AS FINE BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 44-A OF THE KARNATAKA MINOR MINERALS CONCESSION (AMENDMENT) RULES, 2026 AS ONE TIME SETTLEMENT (OTS) WITH PENAL PROVISIONS IN CASE OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF SAID NOTICE AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

and

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

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

The learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice

for the respondents.

3 -

HC-KAR

NC: 2026:KHC:37009-DB WP No. 21514 of 2026

CNR: KAHC010479602026

The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the demand notice dated 15.05.2026 [ impugned order ] issued under Rule 44A of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994. The petitioner is aggrieved, inter alia , on the ground that the said demand notice has been issued without affording the petitioner any opportunity to be heard. It is contended that the impugned order is liable to be set aside as it has been issued in violation of principles of natural justice.

We note that in terms of the impugned order, the petitioner has been called upon to pay a penalty of `1,03,05,680/- on account of extracting excess quantity. Although the demand has been crystallized, the petitioner has also been directed to visit the concerned Office (Office of the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology) "to consult and settle the matter".

The learned Additional Government Advocate fairly states that the impugned order may be construed as a show cause notice. The petitioner is at liberty to respond to the same within a period of 4 weeks from date. And, the concerned authorities would consider

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:37009-DB WP No. 21514 of 2026

HC-KAR

CNR: KAHC010479602026

the petitioner's response, and an order would be passed after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.

In view of the aforesaid statement, no orders are required to be passed in this petition, except that the respondents would be bound down to the statement made on their behalf. We clarify that we have not examined the merits of the demand and nothing stated in this order should be construed as such.

We clarify that all rights and contentions of the parties are reserved including the petitioner's contention that the one time settlement [ OTS ] as contemplated under Rule 44-A of the KMMC Rules, is voluntary and at the option of the lease/licence holder.

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/(K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

SD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 18