Br Surendranath Singh S/O Late Bkrn ... vs Deputy Director Dept Of Mines & Geology on 25 June, 2009

[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Karnataka High Court

Br Surendranath Singh S/O Late Bkrn ... vs Deputy Director Dept Of Mines & Geology on 25 June, 2009

Bench: V.G.Sabhahit

 my A$${§:K"HARANAHALLI ASSOCIATES. 1

 ..1, t){§Pv'rY DIRECTOR

"  RAILWAY STATION ROAD

A V' H 2 COMMISSIONER

IN ms HIGH coum op' KARNMA:-LA     K V'
DATED THES THE 25th BAX    A
     _
THE HON'BLE MR. 39. pyﬁxéiigﬁahg, 
V » zv '.AAi.'{.jj)V{j  " V  V
THE HQNBLE:MR:;JIJ$'i'1§3I§'§.'£3§.;.éA§HAHfF

 i§.y12:5;%1* N"{'9.L}§::.r3"7';\ﬁ:;2j1'} '20()5

BE'I*wEE-N:.. 3. N "

1 BR SUREN'!3RAhIA'FH"'SI'NGH
SIG L-ATE BKRBI 's1NGH
AGED '?'3 YEARS " , 
'R/AT 'N0 :95, * 
3  4TH MAINROAI)
 c;I~£AMARAJPET"
BAESEGALORE-18.  PETITIONER

" DEPT OF MINES 55 GEOLOGY
TUMKUR
DEPARTMENT OF MINES

AND GEOLOGY
NO 49, KARMA BHAVAN

 



RACE COURSE ROAD   
BAhiGALORE«0I I '

3 STATE OF' KARNA'I'AKA;_  ~ 
REPRESENTED BY 1'1*s'sECRE'rA-RY w_   
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIMES " 

AND COMMERCE.  
MSBUILDING N  ;  
BANGAL€}RE~01  ~ -   ; RESPONDENTS

(By Sri: BASAVARAJ KAREDLEY'--.c}A__Eé5R R1"-E )

THIS WP  .;_P'I.LED= _VPR_A'!VjIN(i fro RESTRAIN TI-IE
REsPCNDE:'NTS"-ERCM,ALECFI-Q1s:INr3ImE IRON ORE FINES
STACKED IN.VSY.5I§,O.13G, 'EGNNEEAGI AND BALLENHALLI
VILLAGEQVE' - _CliIKi<kXF§Ai'A KANAHﬁLLI TALUK, TUMKUR
DIS'FRi'C'I',_ A.ND-"D1RECF.TH.E -RESPONDENTS TO CONDUCT
AN INsPEr:rio_1v',~,"A.NED_ "'TnHE.REAF'TER DETERMINE THE
IRON ORE . FINES," _ W.Iri1'CH HAVE BEEN LEGALLY
EXTRACTEB, BY THE.' PEI-NTICNER, AND THE IRON ORE
FINES; WHICH. ARE ILLEGALLY DUMPED IN THE AREA OF

 V.  THE} '1?E:'Ifi'TI_C)NEI"<; «  CCCCC 14 .

 '  "    petition is coming up for Pmliminaxy Heazing
A E--..on._Cthis..daig," SABHAHH' J., delivered the foiiowiug.

ORDER

writ petition is taken up for ﬁnal heanh g with the V' ' V' of Counsel appearing for the parties.

2. This writ pctiﬁon is ﬁlm} seeking for a writ of V' mandamus restraining respondents ﬁnm auctioning imn cm \,»> 'was reeezﬁed _f:>i:9_ of ten years in the name of wife of Sri.BKRN Singh. The mining lease ': for a period of ten years w.e.f. 19.10. 1988. death of Smtlie Bai, the peﬁtioner is as a lessee. Application has aiso been made for 3 .

ﬁnes stacked En Sy.No.130, Honncbagi village, Chjkkanayaﬂakahalh' Taluk, K direct the mspondents to '.315; thereafter determine the legally extracted by the Jjﬁnes which are illegally in the 'of the

2. It is ave-yfmd in :tA§§,'5Vv;it'.7'I;e1:i'ﬁ'oncr is the son sf late mining lease was granted Sri.'.BKRN Singh, the father of of 58 acres of land situated Eat Bcllenahalli village, T§:ﬁi;;"éumkur District. The period of year 1978. Thereafter mining lease \)\ 'izozi :'ﬁ1i"cs'_ mentioned in the monthly report 2005 is lying in stock of the petitioner '-~.paymei:;§_Aof royalty. It is further avcrmcl that adjacent to the icascd in favour of the pchﬁoncr, certain persons ' gave illegally conducted mizfmg opemﬁons and have extracted iron ore and during the month of January, 2005 4 mnewal of the said mining lease and the pending. The petitioner is cx11:it1e(_i....to_ 'A V' 2 operations during the parade-mcyiigof renewal and accordingly, " o3§ora1'io:§v'$ "

conducted and monthly " ﬁrst mspo31dcnt---Deputy of 'mm om, ' the petitioner is xeport and the monthly V' iron on: ﬁnes in stock co: 1 of the month is 1,239,382 tons of iron. in respect of the iron on:

extrapttzd, tho lias paid a myakty of R320 lakhs. a31Ad.__Vha§~ "oeen abkc to remove the same despite the the respondents found that about one lakh tons of imza ore ox' 8 aﬁdavits to show the seized mineral Department has conducted detailed veiiﬁcaticbﬁ ' panchas to the epot and ﬁxed theulczeatiofnh ' points and the sketch shows the ~m3n'?; ' been stocked and handed oveﬁtoxghe i§0ﬁi;i0ne1*pz:0te£:ﬁ0n L' and also for the'minera1s stockee'iV"<:':1_1t~<)»_f' is also shown in the s1§etcRh._'§3y bzieﬁvciamd 12.10.2005 Cemmissioner was report to this court between the parties via, as to whether" eie" beloiig to the petitioner, the lea$eci" the petitioner is ﬁrom the land or illegally extracted by abutting the and thereaﬁer, Commissioner report has e V " * We have heard the lcaraod counsel appearing for Pﬁti'tioI1er and the beamed Government Advocate ' ""éippeari1:3.g for respondents.

5. Leaxned counsel appearing ' 'A reiterated the averments urged submitted that under the pf e"uetion_ T' which is illegally mi:ne<_1, auction the iron are which the land in respect of which mining.:'_lease to the petitioner , to allow the writ s:";eA1;'c_ax~:t.eei Advocate submitted that the very pmyet the'uﬁ1it~.;§et:Z't§ion is to dinect the respondents to u determine the iron ore which has atéttracted by the petitioner and the imn ore ﬁnes in the area of the petitioner and the 'V report is not helpful tn the petitioner and * t,tim.~;isi1o merit in the writ petiﬁerz and the same is an 1312 to \/3 V " * on the above stock".

location of the place where: iron ore ﬁnes have been stocked 'E0

7. We have considered the contentions ' counsel appearing for the ._and V material on record.

8. The xnateziai on one VV lakh tons of iron ore whioh'f2§é§siVVV'vbgcn dumped in the area of the petitiézicr mirigr panchanama by conductizngv o1 i writ petitioner on letter to the Director, Departillciiﬁ of stating as follows:

1" ; ¥;7o--r_I 1€i' to your kind notice that one lakh tons of iron om in my ML area No.2187 and the you can take possession and do wiﬁatéoor you deem ﬁt and further I have no

9. Further, the sketch that is prepared showing and also the placo whom the iron ore ﬁnes extracted in the \.,L seized irml one does not belong to the zewndents to take action as he ' with law. In View of the above : and undertaking of the petitioner and the V. seizure, if is clear that question of any directions to the respondents to conduct 1?

area gamed to the petitioner had been stocked separately shown in the sketch and what was illegally stocked iron ore fines and therefore,' -« there is no merit in the conmnuldee of apgaearing for the writ *' seized comprises of the iron eiegebieh by the petitioner and record would clearly show maﬁf during the month of feund out that adjacent to the - it; favour of petitiaonser certam persone heve mmm' ' g operations and exnacfeﬁ izfon ere thought and the same is fthe ' g given by the petitioner Ué ' ., Whictt ' 12 inspection and thereaﬁcr determine the _& V' has been legally extracted by the ;')¢5titiO11¥:r7«.an-d "ot€:

which has been iﬁcgaiiy dumped inA:4'Z"t_1(b=}a:Aa.f'cat of does not arise. it is also c1e:;;i'V--tf:a3m thé'V.C_é;.mtz1i§éioner's V' mport suiamittcii pursuant tatthu.'§)niér_;3as$éd"hy"this court referred to above, Obﬁtiﬁfﬁs tat)' extracted ore frcm the bis<:1;iﬁ.j:}')it_ soqaiiéa' t§qe.'[,tew9vemg5ent land stored in the arjcagf j§_~aﬁ§B'on¢r::.'v"a1;(£. the report of the Comn:g7ié.'é'.t<V)ﬁei9V5»is to petitioner to substantiate the coiﬁfcﬁtioﬁ iron ore ﬁnes comprises of iron Vote by the petitioner in the area in Vg lease has been granted and about 'sgd iron ore ﬁnes in the Government kand. View of the matter, in View of the Icttcr 313$ gven by the pctitioxmr himself to the

-.AI*e:$<p'§:£nde_t1*;s that peﬁﬁoner does not have any right over the iron ore ﬁnes and that necessary' action as dammed ﬁt by the respondents may be taken in respect of the seized \./K ' V ._V index: / Ne V' 'Host; Ygs/'No 13 than on: ﬁnes and also the skei:€iii"' b 7 seizure 0f iron on: ﬁnes, it is cIea:1*¢tliét:ii 'the cnﬁtled to any relief in this we '} hold that the writ petition is._;_:iiV€:--*sva':<§ic1_»_vof pass the following order: .. A The Writ Pgﬁﬁm ._ Chief Iusticé sd/~ JUDGE

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court