Sri V Manjunath vs The Secretary
2021 Latest Caselaw 7025 Kant

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 7025 Kant
Judgement Date : 22 December, 2021

Karnataka High Court

Sri V Manjunath vs The Secretary on 22 December, 2021

Bench: Chief Justice, Sachin Shankar Magadum

                          -1-


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

   DATED THIS THE 22ND 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.6597 OF 2021 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
SRI V.MANJUNATH
S/O.VENKATESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/AT THUMAKUNTE VILLAGE
PERESANDARA POST
MANDIKAL HOBLI
CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK
& DISTRICT - 562 101                    ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI G.V.NARASIMHA MURTHY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE SECRETARY
   DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES
   VIKASA SOUDHA
   BENGALURU - 560 001

2. THE DIRECTOR
   DEAPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY
   NO.49, KHANIJA BHAVAN
   RACE COURSE ROAD
   BENGALURU - 560 001

3. THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST
    DEPARTMENT OF MINES & COMMERCE
   VIKASA SOUDHA
   OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
   CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 562 105

4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
   CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
   CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 101
                              -2-


5. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
   CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
   CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 101

6. THE DISTRICT TASK FORCE
   (MINES COMMITTEE)
   OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
   CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT
   CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 101                ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA)
                             ---
     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENDORSEMENT    ISSUED   BY   RESPONDENT    NO.3-SENIOR
GEOLOGIST DATED 22.07.2017 AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING THIS DAY, SACHIN SHANKAR
MAGADUM J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

This captioned writ petition is filed seeking following

reliefs:

"i. issue a writ in Certiorari to Quashing the Endorsement issued by 3rd respondent Senior Geologist vide No.GaBhuEe/HeBhuChi/KGaGu/ A-02/2017-18/2649-50 Date:22.07.2017 at ANNEXURE "A".

ii. issue a writ in Mandamus or any other order or direction, directing the 6th respondent the Chairman, District Task Force (Mines) Committee to consider the application of the petitioner dated.09/06.2014 at Annexure-B, to communicate to the 3rd Respondent Senior Geologist to communicate to the 3rd Respondent Senior Geologist to forthwith grant in conditional Quarry Lease to extract Building stone materials in Government land measuring an area of 5 Acre in a land bearing Sy.No.36 of Thirumani Village, Somenahalli, Gudibande Taluk and Chikkaballapur District.

iii. Pass any such other further orders as this Hon'ble court deems as fit and proper under the given facts and circumstances of the case to meet the ends of justice."

2. The petitioner has submitted an application on

09.06.2014 seeking grant of quarrying lease. The authority

as per Annexure-A has rejected the application by holding

that the application has become ineligible and the same is

not in terms of Rule 8-B(2)(d-1) of the Karnataka Minor

Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short 'the Rules').

3. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the

learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents.

4. Learned Additional Government Advocate to

buttress his arguments has placed reliance on the judgment

rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in

WP.No.9714/2021. Placing reliance on the said judgment,

he would submit to this Court that the said judgment would

be squarely applicable to the present case on hand and

therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.

5. We have perused the grounds urged in the writ

petition and also the judgment cited by the learned

Additional Government Advocate in WP.No.9714/2021. It

would be useful to refer to para-6 of the judgment, which

reads as under:

"6. All applications for grant of quarrying leases which were pending as on 12th August, 2016 were declared as ineligible by virtue of sub-rule (1) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of 1994. Only those applications which were covered by any of the clauses (a) to (d) and (d-1) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of 1994 were saved from the applicability of sub-rule (1) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of 1994. In this case, the petitioner is relying on clause (d-1) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of 1994. The requirement of clause (d-1) is that no objection certificates must have been received by the Department of Mines and Geology before 12th August, 2016 from the Deputy Conservator of Forest and the Assistant Commissioner. The other requirement is of receiving of the Department a joint inspection report of the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Director or Senior Geologist before 12th August, 2016. Even assuming that a deeming fiction was available under sub-rule (6) of Rule 8 of the said Rules of 1994, the same is available only in relation to no objection certificates and not in respect of the joint inspection report as contemplated by clause (d-1) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of 1994.

Admittedly, the joint inspection report was not received before 12th August, 2016 by the Department. Therefore, one of the conditions for applicability of clause (d-1) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of 1994 was not satisfied in this case. Hence, the impugned order is right only to the extent that the application made by the petitioner was ineligible under sub-rule (1) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of 1994 as none of the exceptions specifically carved out by clauses (a) to (d) and (d-1) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of 1994 were applicable in this case.