Smt Susheela A vs State Of Karnataka Dept Of Mines And ... on 16 April, 2009

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Susheela A vs State Of Karnataka Dept Of Mines And ... on 16 April, 2009

Bench: V.G.Sabhahit

EHTHEEHEHICOURTCH'KARNATAKAANTBANGALQRE

ms mm'aLE HR. 9.13. DIﬂAKA.ﬁAM,«CHi§F  "

{DATED THIS "me 15*" DAY OF APRIL 2009 5  Q

PRESENT

AND

'ms H0i'¢'Bi.E MR.JU$'~ﬁ'€£ V§Gp$AB_¥i!sf€IF" 

 

wars" {cannon Ng_sso3 kos=k%%2voo_§€(A G#.1'~§éM_l§-ML)

BEHNEENZ

  

sm SU$HEE_{.A A; 1
AGE:5$'%'RE{  A ~   
w/0 s.M.%szwAuN€iAIAHw--  
R/Q..$U'$G*W,;A?*A_1lY"' " .. 2'
F.AMA'NA§3_ARI%M iragux  
EANGALOFLEV-RU RAL BEST-RICT

s h§1#.§l3ii/"'|iXTI--i"..:' A 
.AGE:50 YRS. :- '

V,  s/as sHp;r~:s<ARAr$§>A
 A"&*a $.UGGANiwE*-*iALLY

RAMANAGARAM TALUK

 .B:AP§G1&L.§)?{£ RURAL. DISTRICT

%_M'%«Ruk)%%é;%sgr§iuRTHv s
 A':§E:'5"O was

SKESHAMANNA
Rﬂ)SUGGANAHALD(

"  RAMANAGARAM TALUK
 BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT

SIDDALINGAIAH

AGE:61 YRS

s/0 MUDDABASAVAIAH

R/O SUGGANAHALLY 

,.-r'H



(av SMT : UJWALA $2., ADVOCATE
KUMAR, ADVOCATES

-2-

RAMANAGARAM TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT

H R KUMAR

AGE:37 YRS

S/O RAJASHEKARAIAH

R/'0 SUGGANAHALLY
RAMANAGARAM TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT

)::

STATE or KARNATAKA    
BEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY E
M.S.$UILDING  --   
BANGALORE  M    

REPRESENTED BY I'TS'SECR&TARYf_=.. " 

1';-I2  €§F4.M'I$SIONER
sow, OFVKARN'ﬁC.{AKA;~
M.S;BUELDING' ,   *

A _B_yANG'A¥_QREV 

I aepuﬁ eaamxssxomaa

aAN£:ALoRs RURAL DISTRICT

A  "3.A'NGAL¢R?E
%k%*TH e§.s§izsTANT cowsmssxousa

 R,aM;z:€AGAaAM TALUK

BAEEGALORE RURAL DISTRICT

 BANGALORE
Vsupekxmenoenr OF POLICE

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT

BANGALORE . . . RESPONDENTS

(By Sr: BASAVARAE KARREDDY, GOVERNMENT ADVGCATE FOR RESPONDENTS 1 TC} 5 ) E93 M/3; *;<:}jv~«.{a;RIA%m:>%% " A V' THIS wm. :5 men PRAYING TO:: D1REC'?:.""!7l~iE RESPONQENTS TO srop THE smszo QUARRYING--«'IN_f"TF%E an/ea sec or ARKAVATHI seven NEAR SUGGA--NA..HA§;t_.I VILUXGE, RAMANAGARA TALUK, eANGALojReVtsiiue.A::se DISTRICT.

THIS werr PETI'l'ION coetizhisro.P>.%Foellje;RTi%i'sii'« HEARING on THIS BAY, THE CQU1?§T.'iDE»L,1VERED.."'T§HE{ FoLLowms:~-- % A (Delivered ?,£}, CJ.) The petitioners, pi1i;lic:"lnterestei1 Vﬁierslons, have ﬁled. the above ;.3_ut}.l;'<: elllegiiig that illegal sand quarryingls».:;éi--s§g:_§:e':'rieo":voe'river bed of Arkavathi near S'§igg.eoAeh'ielVl*,{_:i:iIlba'ee';-.v.Ramanagaram Taluk, Bangalore Rural mstrietl. V stream of the alleged illegal quaf{ryi:ig ooeratiorl, tlze ground water level is decreasing thelllientirev ecological balance in the village has been also suffer from air and sound pollution on"'*4«.acs:oiiritAof the impugned illegal sand mining. ;"'Corr1pl.a'iVnts made to the respondents in this regard also 'héveénot served the purpose. The continuous trafﬁc of the

-Erectors and Lorries, which are transporting sand without V any permit, poses danger to the life and safety of the school going students and the egee people. Learned 5" :7"

-4-

counse! appearing for the petitioners produced the recent photographs taken during the impugned iilegal quarrying operation. Hence, the petitioners, inter aiia, have sought for the following reliefs: , "(a) issue an appropriate direction to Respondents to stop the sand quarrying.Er§"th'a'p1-L--...

river bed of Arkavathi river near Sugg3_n~a.ha.l1lt _ village, Ramanagara Taluk;""Ba'ng_ai.ore. Rural' L"

District; _ _ . .

(b) issue an approplriiate directionu rseclond...:rvresponde'r':t:'_' to and curb the iiiegai ply:lru'§V"~-ofwreh.icles'which transport sand excr;-mated °f_ro'nr: »-- 'river bed of Arkavathi ;w¥t.hoot ~.poss"eseingv valid permits, approvals, "":'s€incti--9ns elndrorivving Hcences; an appropriate direction to the to ensure that there is no sand qi;a'rr§éE'ng in the river bed of Arkavathi river . near Sugganahalli village, Ramanagara Taiuk, "v._Banga!ore Rural District, as it is leading to it 'ecoiogical imbalance and is polluting environment?'

2. In response to the above averments, on Behalf of the respondents, Geologist in the office of Director, Department of Mines and Geoiogy,"ftatnanedere; K have ﬁled an affidavit today, averriné es" he«reun.der.

" I submit that no sand eueiwjring iease in Arkavathi river bed in-,Suganéi2a.__EEi' _yii%.ege""isw given to anybedy. Thetiegsartment has been keeping a watc'hi_"e.n thei.iiiiiegdvfsand rnining activities in the seid."afea?' end:.ii'w"nehever it is noticed that ._som_e" ;>e¢ipse it the sand', cases aj_géiin:s"t"such people and 'h'a've":tiee:n«vsei2ed and they have been b'efd'e*e_ the competent Courts of saw, "In the'A:yedr~.é2G0'7~08, totaiiy 103 cases _havei"d.eevn VVbeok«ed"e'§ainst various persons and ..ﬁ_3'V.Gi3 vehicies_we_re seized for iiiegai mining and tfenshoﬁationiiief sand in the said area. During _ *;"ea:rv"_j..2008~09, in ail 124 cases were """'be6iéedV.'and the said number of vehicles were seieedfiand the accused and the vehicles were mwdiduced before the competent courts. Apart its from that, a fine of Rs.3,22,500/- is collected in 58 cases during the year 2008»-09. "

3. The afﬁdavit ﬁled on behalf of the respondents clearly substantiates the grievance of the However, even though in the affidavit it is respondents have collected Rs.3V;2i,'S0QV/¥._ as cases booked against the persons tc~;.in'z1_zcarr°.fi'z_1;g on mining during the year 2008¥t'J:9T;"l.the l.fa~:::% that of such cases increased froni 103' to'j41VV2-Mn the"'ye"er 2008- 2009, by itself, discloses :'th_e.ll"ia7;;thorities are not serious in cqrh*ing_-.the iifhgiiug-n7eo.j_~~ilVi_e'g::alI sand quarrying operation for to them.

'' .'_That'o'p'orl:;..4v_et<eh...'though the Rule provides for taking stringent 3:C§ion "to..."~éurb illegal sand mining and also .__Aaga:§iji}st1thev%_own'érs...o.f«'the vehicles by which, illegal sand is V.V,L'i§éi"r'l«gA tre'nsoo'rt--ed without permit, no further actéon has beeh"tal(entj';_.inf'vthe rapondents against the owners of the vehit:i$17f_or the loss caused by such illegal sand quarrying V' "XfoApei'a'tion. The authorities are yet to assess the damage ﬁansed by the illegal sand quarrying operators.

- 7 -

5. For ail these reesons, while ordering writ as prayed for, we direct the Secretary, Commerce°*--.and Industries Department, to take stringent action erring officers forthwith and proceed in accor:§1av:3'¢~'ext"

' law. We aiso direct the Director :of""Mine_s"--.an.d assess the damage caused in the Atinougzned recover the same from at! thée--.p'er'sons;----yVhof"hai:.e"carried on the alieged i!lega.!.__saﬁtd"'Ac3t;eri1;_iAngttopefétion, in accordance with law.

The writ PTetttio:rz;_:is dieposed '-otaccordingiy. Chief Justice A' .....

Judge T ﬁuma.

V" r. . 'V L . " ifid ex:

Web Host :~rg§/ No

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court