M/S Chowgle And Company Private Limited vs State Of Karnataka on 25 November, 2009

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

M/S Chowgle And Company Private Limited vs State Of Karnataka on 25 November, 2009

Bench: Anand Byrareddy

IN1HH3HKﬂICOURT(ﬁ?KARNKDMU&HTBANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 25*' DAY OF NOVEMBER 

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. 9.1). DINAI{ARAN,A»VCHIE}3"JUé';§'I( 3E _'  

AND .
THE I-ION'BLE MRJUSTICE   :3
WRIT PETITION NO.34571_:/:2.QC9_» (GMQMMST

BENNEEN:

PRIVATE L1MI'I'EI;)a   O   ., 
MARMUGAO 'GOA _  " 
 "       PETITIONER

1 M/S CHOWOLE AND COM§ANY' A   V

[By Sri : ANAréT"r.i:z§NDAG:;;'--SRAOVOCATE FOR M /s. UJWALA A
MANDGI <3: AEf.5OCL'\'1'E:S]..V_    _ _'

1 STATE OF KARNATAKA 
REP BY-'ITS SECRETARY
 , DEPARTMENT OF'*FQRE»ST
 "EcO':;OGY~AND ENVIRONMENT
'*._;»tr 5 --BUILD!N{} ._
'DR .AMB}§DKr':R= .RC)AD
EANGALOREEEOOO1

7,2 -- THE EORESTER

'wﬁNEEDN$mN

K V' * sA1~m1;R RANGE, BELLARY

  NGE FOREST OFFICER

  VVSANDUR RANGE
u 'SANDUR RANGE, BELLARY

 



4 THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
BELLARY DIVISION, BELLARY

5 THE DIRCTOR
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
KHANIJA EHAVAN, 5TH FLOOR
RACE COURSEROAD
BANGALORE~56000I

6 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR   ' 1. 
DEPARTMENT OP MINES AND GEOLOG__Y 
COLLEGE ROAD, HOSPET  _  

'7 THE CONTROLLER OF MINES (SZ) 

INDIAN BUREAU OF MINES  f  
29, INDUSTRIAL SUEURE~,.¢_IIND STAGE, 
TUMKUR ROAD,  ~ -       'I 
YESHWANTHPURA, SANGALOPE22  'I A  '

8 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
SURVEY OF INDIAf°  . '
SARJAPUR ROAD. V " " "

KORAM,ANGALA1IN"D:BL;OC_K _ 
EANGAL.ORE--34' -» I   *-

9 LAXMINARAYANA M_I1\:'ING (BOIVIPANY
A REGD PAR'1*N,ERSHIP"EIRM
 REP ITS PARTNER .
 "SR1  
 S/OD N GO-PAL KRISHNA
 :09, SANNVIIR-'IIC_ ROAD
EIASIWANIAGUDI; " BANGALORE
' ,   *  RESPONDENIS

 jay SR1 EASAVARAJ KARREDDY, PRL. GA FOR R1 TO R6;
4SIU.G.DRAG1'--IAvAN, SR. ADVOCATE FOR RAJESH & RAJESH

 FOR «WI

 '   WRIT PE'1"'ITION IS PILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
 7 _ 22'?'_"OI"~'FHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING T0 QUASH THE

S.
E

E ,,,,,,,, »;

 



IMPUGNED SKETCH SUBMITTED BY RESPONDENTS VIDE

ANNEX--N AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 18.11.09 PASSED BY THE R4 MARKED AS ANNEX--U RESPECTIVELY AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO STRICTLY COMPLY WITIII. f-T'HE«V DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN _T_ERMjs-.. THE ORDER DTD 24.04.09 IN w.P.NO.423I/2009 VIDE ANNEX~K AND FURTHER DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT"T0jfINDUL_GE_ IN MALPRACTICE, FRAUD AND NOT To"MIs4s-II-.ITER_PRET ORDER AT ANN}-E',X~K BY RE FIXING THE EO.UI\iDARIEs- LEASE GRANTED TO THE PETYHONER. THIS WRIT PE'I'ITION cOM'IN.§§"~~..UP TOR --..1§r~?E£;I:§/IINARY T HEARING ON THIS DAY, THE C'O_I_}R-._T DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-- -.

[Deliveiiedby Sri Basavaifaj D'"I{aEre-ddyg..I_1earIied5Priricipai Government Advocate takesi'hotiee oTiffbeIia1;f-oi' re'spoTndents--1 to 6.

2. The petitionerin "petition is seeking to quash the impugnedsketeh prepared and submitted by responclents--3, 4, 9 order dated 18": November 2009 issued i\fO.'V.4--Deputy Conservator of Forests, Ttvvhereundeér..tT1eT.provisiona1 permission granted to the 2' Ljrn_c_lisptit.ed area is withdrawn. petiti'oIcI.er'T*~..tAo Carry out mining activities oniy in the

3. Heard Sri Anant Mandgi, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Basavaraj learned Principal Government Advocate appyeiaringlrl V' respondents~l to 6 and Sri K.C¢.Raghavan, Senior? counsel appearing for contesting resporidentp '~ . 2 V'

4. It is brought to the"'irf;pugned proceedings dated 18. 1 l.2O(l9Vh Conservator of Forests, the Range to take action to see that no 'carried out by the petitioner in further orders.

5. In if the mining leased area granted toytﬁheiipetitioneriis not at all disputed by the Deputy Coriservator' oi':.Fo'r'e.sts, the direction issued by him by the ;i.,_gimpugnetil..procele'd.ir1gsV"to the Range Forest Officer is not only vvwithout but also illegal.

AOf- course, Mr.Anant Mandgi, learned Senior Counsel 2 our attention to the directions of this Court

(iv) Survey of India, and take appropriate decision as to the alleged encroachment by the petitioner with reference to the survey records and other relevant available and documents produced -I regard. If any encroachment of is found, the respondents assess the damages caused'«Von_accountvofz such illegal mining outside the mining area and recover thee same"fr.orn the petitioner;

The respondents fdii'ected"t.oV the tools, and to the petitioner. on.Vtiie"c'on.ditio'n that the same shall-be pro:dticedg'i'bei7ore the respondents / jurisdictional l'.Ma.gistrate as and when required' "by__lavv, subject to the finding in _ir1s_pection to be conducted by the respondent in the presence of the pe_titioner and Controller of Mines, Indian it Bturevau of Mines, Bangalore, along with the V * nominee not below the rank of a Deputy Director by the Director General, Survey of India, referred to above;

material' .. V' "

(V) Vi) The ore which is already seized by the authorities which is alleged to have been mined outside the leased out area shall be in the custody of the forest authorities and the authorities are at liberty to l"

appropriate decision in the matter i to the ﬁnding in the ':

assessment of the damages andto recover '~ V the same from the petitiorier; Subject to the ,fin_dingi"'arritreldeiat fourth respondent#Depi1tyV::' Conlsevrvator of Forests, iBe1Iar:y~»-- the Controller Mines: indian""*Bureau of Mines_; 1 "Eia.nga.1or*e.;' petitioner shall rectify the Violatioriﬂiz-y'vrernoving the overburden waste4-Whatsoeireir'«within two weeks from , .};the'~date ofsuchéiorder passed by the fourth respondent and the Controller of Mines, it a. lb'-ureau of Mines, Bangalore; and Vii) T he '1'espondents are directed to permit the petitioner to undertake the mining llkoperation in the leased out area which is d not disputed by the forest authorities."

7.1. In our considered opinion, there is no dispute at all to the fact that the said order dated 24*" April 2009 made in Writ Petition No.4231/2004 came to be passed by when the forest authorities initiated action ltheiel Lokayukta report to stop mining the mining operators who have_encroached into'- the forest area and this Court while holding report and the sketch attached th.ejretc--i_lf 'beltlfiee basis for the respondents therein to pro.s_e*cut.gp 'respective First Information Reports if Vtollilqiiash the First Information Reports the petitioner herein. gave the following'directiolnls: l VDept'rty_ _____ Conservator of Forests. if Bellary Division. Bellary--fourth ,VgRes.pondent, shall inspect and survey impugned area leased out to the petitioner. in the presence of the petitioner, the Controller of Mines, Indian Bureau of Mines, Bangalore, along with the nominee not below the

(ii) '' retiim. A rank of the Deputy Director by the Director General, Survey of India,g._V*-do and take appropriate decision as the alleged encroachment by petitioner with reference' to survey records and v'oth;er..feieyant material available. an arid" ._ _. produced in this. V:revgard§'* ._ If r . encroachment of forest'-Iand is fotiridj the respor1de'1'1ts"--c_agi§ej. ate': liberty to assess' they.VV-V-damagees on accoiintih' of %su'ch'"__i11Vegai.5 mining outs.ide""the 'mining area ' i '--._the"-~-vseahe from the cpemiaiiei; '4 The». respondents are directed to the tools, vehicies and ~ ghachineryb to the petitioner on the that the same shall be gidproduced before the respondents/ . required by law, jiirisdictional Magistrate as and when subject to the finding in the inspection to be conducted by the fourth respondent "they i

-13".

any dispute interse with regard to/the boundaries of theerea leased out to them under their lease deeds and the sketches thereto.

The writ petition is disposed of aeeordingljf. " '4 V' U) cw image ' UDGE index: Yes/No"/_- T' V _ Web Host: V V' Ia

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court