Karnataka High Court
C S Sudharani vs State Of Karnataka on 17 December, 2021
Bench: Chief Justice, Sachin Shankar Magadum
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.15447 OF 2021 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
C S SUDHARANI
W/O NATARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
NO.126, HENNURU MAIN ROAD,
NEAR CHANNAKESHAVA TEMPLE,
ST.THOMAS TOWN POST,
BENGALURU-560084.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.RAVINDRA GAJANAN KOLLE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001
2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES,
VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.
2
3. THE DIRECTOR AND DMG COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY,
KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD,
BENGALURU-560001.
4. THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY,
ROOM NO.S3 AND S3 A, 2ND FLOOR,
ZILLA ADALITH BHAVAN, NH NO.75 (04)
KUMBARAHALLI, KOLAR-563103.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA FOR R1 TO 4)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1. ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING 4TH
RESPONDENT SENIOR GEOLOGIST AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY
TO IMMEDIATELY EXECUTE AND REGISTER A QUARRY LEASE OVER
AN AREA OF 10.00 ACRES IN SY.NO.12 P1 OF GUTTAPALLI
VILLAGE, SRINIVASAPURA TALUKA, KOLAR DISTRICT, PURSUANT
TO AN ORDER DATED 10.07.2018 PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT
IN WRIT PETITION NO.14383/2018 AND CONSEQUENT ISSUE OF A
CONDITIONAL GRANT NOTIFICATION IN FORM GL-C DATED
10.08.2018 AND GRANT NOTIFICATION IN FORM GL DATED
06.12.2018 FOLLOWED BY ISSUING AN APPROVED QUARRY PLAN
DATED 28.12.2018 AND ALSO AN ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE
CERTIFICATE DATED 08.08.2019 VIDE RULE 8 (1-A), AS PER
PETITIONERS QL APPLICATION DATED 25.05.2018 PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURES-A,B,C,D,E AND F RESPECTIVELY, BY FURTHER
DIRECTING 3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENTS TO WITHDRAW THEIR
INTERNAL LETTERS DATED 21.07.2021, 11.06.2021 PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURES-G AND H RESPECTIVELY, AND /OR AND 2. PASS ANY
OTHER FURTHER ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS AS FIT
AND PROPER TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, CHIEF
JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed seeking the
following reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other order
or direction directing 4th respondent Senior Geologist
& competent Authority to immediately execute and
register a Quarry Lease over an area of 10.00 Acres in
Sy.No.12 P1 of Guttapalli Village, Srinivasapura
Taluka, Kolar District, pursuant to an Order dated
10.07.2018 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ
Petition No.14383/2018 and consequent issue of a
Conditional Grant Notification in Form GL-C dated
10.08.2018 and Grant Notification in Form GL dated
06.12.2018 followed by issuing an Approved Quarry
Plan dated 28.12.2018 and also an Environmental
Clearance Certificate dated 08.08.2019 vide Rule 8 (1-
A), as per Petitioner's QL Application dated
25.05.2018 produced at Annexures - A, B, C, D, E & F
respectively, by further directing 3rd & 4th respondents
to withdraw their internal letters dated 21.07.2021 &
11.06.2021 produced at Annexures-G & H
respectively; and/or
b) Pass any such other further Orders as this
Hon'ble Court deems as fit and proper to meet the
ends of justice."
3. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing
for the respondents, at the very outset, submitted that the
controversy involved in the writ petition is squarely covered by
the judgment and order dated 12.03.2021 passed in a batch
of writ petitions leading case being W.P.No.29534/2019
(GM-MM-S).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard
submits that in fact in the case of the petitioner, the
notification for grant of lease has been already issued and as
such, the respondents are required to only execute the lease
deed and the application for grant of lease need not be
reconsidered. It is submitted that the case of the petitioner is
on a better footing than the cases which were decided by the
judgment referred by the learned Additional Government
Advocate.
5. In this regard, the learned Additional Government
Advocate has taken the Court to paragraph 7 of the aforesaid
judgment, wherein the Court has taken note of the fact that in
W.P.No.4034/2020, the petitioner had contended that on the
basis of the application made by the petitioner on 24.06.2006,
a notification was issued on 10.08.2018 providing for grant of
lease to the petitioner under the Karnataka Minor Mineral
Concession Rules, 1994. The submission is that there is no
difference in the case of the petitioner than the case of the
petitioner in W.P.No.4034/2020 which has been decided by
the aforesaid judgment in W.P.No.29534/2019 (supra).
6. We have considered the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned
Additional Government Advocate. We are of the considered
view that the issues involved in the writ petition are decided
by the judgment and order dated 12.03.2021 passed in a
batch of writ petitions leading case being W.P.No.29534/2019
(GM-MM-S). As such, we decide this writ petition in terms of
the aforesaid judgment in W.P.No.29534/2019 (supra).
7. The operative portion of the judgment and order
dated 12.03.2021 reads as under:
"(i) We direct that the cases of the present
petitioners based on any of clauses (a) to (d-1) of
sub-rule (2) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of 1994 shall
be considered by the concerned authority of the State
in the light of the amendment to clause (e) of sub-rule
(2) of Rule 8-B made by virtue of Rule 7 of the
Amendment Rules of 2020;
(ii) We clarify that if in any of these cases,
eligibility of the petitioners under any of clauses (a) to
(d-1) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of
1994 is established, the grant of lease cannot be
denied on the ground that the same has not been
executed within a period of twenty-four months from
12th August 2016;
(iii) Appropriate decision in these cases for grant
of the lease shall be taken by the concerned authority
of the State Government within a period of three
months from today."
8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
The pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
CA
