Karnataka High Court
Smt Sahana vs State Of Karnataka on 20 April, 2017
Bench: Chief Justice, P.S.Dinesh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU
Dated this the 20th day of April, 2017
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE MR SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHERJEE,
CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P S DINESH KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.2190 OF 2017 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
SMT.SAHANA
W/O.RAMACHANDRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
RESIDING AT ALLU NIVAS
MOKA ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR
BELLARI-583 104 ...PETITIONER
(BY SHRI.R.G.KOLLE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT.,
DEPT. OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES
VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
2
3. THE DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY
KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU-560 001
4. THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST (MINES) &
COMPETENT AUTHORITY
DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY
2ND GATE, CANTONMENT
BALLARI-583 104
5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & CHAIRMAN
DISTRICT TASK FORCE (MINES)
COMMITTEE, BALLARI DISTRICT
BALLARI-583 104 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI.VENKATASWAMY GANGADHAR BHANUPRAKASH,
ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH OR SET ASIDE THE ENDORSEMENT
DTD:2.11.2016 ISSUED BY R-4 SENIOR GEOLOGIST &
COMPETENT AUTHORITY PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A
REJECTING THE QL APPLICATION DTD:2.2.2016 FILED BY
THIS PETITIONER TO EXTRACT MURRAM, WHICH IS A
NON-SPECIFIED MINOR MINERAL, OVER AN AREA OF
09-00-00 (A-G-A) IN GOVT, GAYALU LAND SY NO.368/A OF
HALAKUNDI VILLAGE IN BELLARI TALUKA, BELLARY
DISTRICT FOR A PERIOD OF 20 YEARS IMMEDIATELY AS
PER QL APPLICATION DTD:2.2.2016 FILED BY THIS
PETITIONER PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE
FOLLOWING:-
3
ORDER
Mr.V.G.Bhanuprakash, learned additional government advocate, accepts notice for all the respondents. Therefore, formal service of notice to the respondents is dispensed with.
2. This is a writ petition, in substance, seeking for a direction to the authorities to execute the lease in favour of the writ petitioner.
3. Admittedly, the application for grant of lease was made prior to the amendment to the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994. Therefore, the endorsement issued against the writ petitioner was erroneous, inasmuch as the authorities proceeded on the erroneous assumption that the petitioner was ineligible.
4
4. Mr.Bhanuprakash, learned additional government advocate, submits that till today, no-objection from the environment department has not reached the concerned authorities. It is the responsibility of the authorities to obtain such clearance as, also, the technical reports, if any.
5. The concerned authorities are directed to send their opinion to the authorities of the Mines and Geology Department, within two weeks.
6. We set aside the endorsement dated November 2, 2016, produced as Annexure-A to the writ petition and direct the authorities to consider the prayer for execution of the lease deed within four weeks from the date of communication of this order, as we are informed that all necessary no objections have been obtained from the department concerned. 5
7. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
8. We make no order as to costs.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE Yn.