Karnataka High Court
S Nageswara Reddy vs State Of Karnataka on 16 March, 2017
Bench: Chief Justice, R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF MARCH, 2017
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHERJEE,
CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
WRIT PETITION NOs. 2303-2304 OF 2017 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN
S NAGESWARA REDDY
S/O SAMBASHIVA REDDY,
AGED 45 YEARS,
VENKATESHWAR NILAYA,
23RD WARD, 5TH CROSS, CHAPPARADAHALLI,
HOSPET-583201
BALLARI DISTRICT
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI R G KOLLE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPT. OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES,
VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001
2. THE DIRECTOR & COMMISSIONER
DEPT OF MINES & GEOLOGY,
2
KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD,
BENGALURU-560001
3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR & COMPETENT AUTHORITY
DEPT OF MINES & GEOLOGY,
COLLEGE ROAD, HOSPETE-583201
4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & CHAIRMAN
DISTRICT TASK FORCE COMMITTEE (MINES) BELLARY,
BELLARY-583101
5. GEOLOGIST & TECHNICAL OFFICER
DEPT OF MINES & GEOLOGY,
COLLEGE ROAD, HOSPETE-583201
6. ASSISTANT ENGINEER
DEPT OF MINES & GEOLOGY,
COLLEGE ROAD, HOSPETE-583201
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V G BHANUPRAKASH, AGA )
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
PRAYING TO QUASH OR SET ASIDE BOTH REJECTION
ORDERS PASSED BY R-3 REFUSING TO GRANT AND
EXECUTE BOTH QUARRYING LEASES TO EXTRACT
MURRAM, WHICH IS A NON-SPECIFIED MINOR MINERAL,
COVERED UNDER KMMC RULES 1994 (AS AMENDED),
BASED ON HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS / DISTORTED TECHNICAL
REPORT IN FORM-S DTD.21.5.2016 GIVEN BY R-5, OVER
AN AREA OF 08-00-00 AND 09-00-00 (A-G-A)
RESPECTIVELY IN GOVERNMENT PARAMBOKU WASTE
LAND IN SY.NO.117 OF RAJAPURA VILLAGE, HOSPETE
TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT VIDE ANNEX-A & B
RESPECTIVELY, ETC.
3
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
By filing these writ petitions, the writ petitioner has challenged two orders passed by the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Hosapete, both dated July 25, 2016, being Annexures-A and B respectively, rejecting his application for extraction of minor mineral, that is, murram, based on the technical report submitted by the technical officer of the Department.
2. Mr.R.G.Kolle, learned advocate for the writ petitioner, submits that the technical report is not complete, inasmuch as no specific finding has been made. It is only stated that the area was not 'so suitable' for granting lease.
3. Mr.Kolle emphatically submits that the area is suitable for quarrying operation and he has relied on certain reports submitted by the private laboratories. 4
4. We regret to record that the Deputy Director, Mines and Geology, Hosapete, did not apply his mind independently. He has perused the report and rejected the application of the petitioner.
5. We feel that to avoid further controversy in the matter, the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Hosapete, shall appoint a technical officer from the Department to inspect the area, with notice to the petitioner and in the presence of the petitioner or his representative.
6. The technical officer shall be free to take a sample from the area and send it for examination to a technical laboratory at Bengaluru.
7. After submission of the report and upon consideration of the report of the said laboratory, the Deputy Director shall consider the application of the writ petitioner and pass a well-reasoned and speaking order after giving opportunities of hearing to the petitioner or his 5 representative. Let the order be passed within four months from the date of communication of this order.
8. Therefore, the orders dated July 25, 2016, being Annexures-A and B to the writ petition, passed by the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Hosapete, are set aside.
9. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petitions stand disposed of.
10. We, however, make no order as to costs.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE vgh*