Karnataka High Court
M/S Vsl Mining Company Pvt Ltd vs State Of Karnataka on 4 January, 2011
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S.Bopanna
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated this the 41311 day of January, 2011 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR.J.s.KHi:iiAR, CHIEF " ANS ms HC)N'BLEE MR.JUS'I'IC.E3. A.s.B--o15Ai\i1$:.=t* W? No. 41084/2019 [C}i\[[i~«M1\"/i:~»S.'j.A.' ' BETWEEN: A it t .1. M /s VSL Mining Company' Ltd ~ A Company Registered undeerthe-~..L' Companies Act, .V Represented by its't}PA Ir}.'_oI1der It t * . Sri.M.Pooba1an S/O 1\ii.1\/it.ithi1swan1§,}j _ 14*" Ward, Ashoka"C'oiony," 3 S8»f1dUF»;3€H~€1i'y B£_8t1':.it:-17 A ' = _ if = j _ V . Petitioner [By Sri L M Chiflafiaiidajfjan Adi»--.,)=_ AND: 1. State of Ka.rnataka« Repr'iesented'-- .its-- Secretary to The Depar'tment of industries and Coiinmerce. (SS1, Textiles And Mines} '?Vi5kasa_a S0L'1Vd]i"i8;;'V ¥3einga_lo:e--56000i . "'Depa'rtifne5nt of Mines and Geology No__.4'9..V Khanija Bhavan. Race Course Road, 'A J BaI1ga}0i'€-560001 it w7i'I"1e Deputy Director (Mines) Department of Mines and Geology Hospet, Bellary District Respondents [By Sri RC}. Koile, AGA for respondents) This Writ Petition is fiied under Articles 226 and 227' of the Constitution of India praying to call for records which ultimately restzlted in passing the iinpiigraed order Annexure A dated 13.8.2010 passed by the 1st respondent, and the order of the 3rd respondent. vide Annexure--B dated 2 23/25. 1.1.2010, cancelling the stockyard permission given to the petitioner and etc., This Writ Petition coming on for further consideration this day, Chief Justice made the following: " O R D E R
J.S.KI'IEI-IAR, C.J. (Oral) :
Notice to the respondents." "
Sri.R.G.Kolle, learned lG__olVern.me1_iAt" ~ accepts notice on behalf of respondents_.
2. The following order by this Court, on 17. 12.252 4o;5i:g'l: ~ 1 f'.I.i.earn.e"d't;ou,nse1._for' thepetitioner has invited our zvlattentiopn to1.4tl;e'inf1pugned order dated 25.}. 1.2010 'v{Ar;nexui'é4-B)i.»i.A-i._pertisal of the impugned order reveals, 't.lj1atft--hle' ---Stoc'k--yard registration granted to the >.petitionei'._ lias' been canceiled on account of
-the fact, that "the petitioner is neither a mining tease holde.1'..._nor he has a processing unit. .g flllearned counsel for the petitioner seeks an it 'adjouriir-sent, so as to enable him to place on the rec'or?_d.e:of this Court, material to demonstrate, that t__he-petitioner is either a mining tease holder or ~~ has an existing processing unit.
_. Prayer is allowed. Further material, if so ' required, be placed on the record of this case by moving a miscellaneous Writ application. Needful, be done within one week from today. Post for further consideration on 4.1.201 1."
Despite having accepted the prayer made by the learned coimsel for petitioner, to enable him to piace further 3 material on the record of the Case, to demonstrate that the petitioner is either a mining lease hoider oi".i*:as an existing processing unit, no such materiaI_...._has't- placed on the record of this case.
3. In the aforesaid CirCiimsta11Ces,'i'we no other alternative, but to infer, th'a,At7the dated 25.} 1.2010 has passed" 'tondkg a valid consideration. ' V d d it it
4. Despite "the petitioner still has any he is either a mining lease i'1oid--eoif':or ar1v,eXisting'processing uitiit, it will be open Vito" to approach the competent au,thority viz;L;' fieputy Director(i\/fines) (respondent r __ the relevant material and seek dd of the impugned order. In the aforesaid Q e'vent1,{ajit}i, the Deputy Directorflviines) [respondent M33 shall consider the claim of the petitioner and pass erder in accordance with law. The order shall be passed within two months of the receipt of the material produced by the petitioner, aiong with a certified copy of the instant order. Alternatively, it wiil be open to the 4 petitioner to file a fresh writ petition on the same cause of action, with the aforesaid details and part;icu1ars.'"----_
5. The instant writ petition is disposed. _ aforesaid terms.
'+:"3,i§:' ii ., Index: Y/N