Karnataka High Court
M/S Sathyanarayana vs The Additional Chief Secretary To ... on 14 July, 2022
Bench: Acting Chief Justice, J.M.Khazi
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. ALOK ARADHE
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M. KHAZI
W.P. NO.10404 OF 2021 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
M/S. SATHYANARAYANA
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGISTERED UNDER
THE PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
NO.142/2, A2, KOLACHALAM COMPOUND
BALLARI, KARNATAKA-583101
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER
MR. B. RUDRA GOUDA.
... PETITIONER
(BY MR. UDAYA HOLLA, SR. COUNSEL FOR
MISS/MRS. MONICA PATIL, ADV.,)
AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF MINES
DR. SHASTRI BHAVAN
RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD
NEW DELHI-110001.
2. REGIONAL CONTROLLER OF MINES
INDIAN BUREAU OF MINES
MINISTRY OF MINES
NO.29, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB
II STAGE, TUMKUR ROAD
BENGALURU-560022.
2
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT, (MINING, SSI & TEXTILES)
COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT
VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.
4. DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
KHANIJA BHAVAN
RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU-560001.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. S.S. MAHENDRA, AGA FOR R3 & R4
MR. K.A. ARIGA, CGC FOR R1
R2 SERVED)
---
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR
DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE
REVOCATION OF APPROVAL OF MODIFIED MINING PLAN ISSUED
BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 DATED 01.06.2021 BEARING
NO.279/418/96/BNG THEREBY UNILATERALLY REVOKING THE
MINING PLAN APPROVAL GRANTED TO THE PETITIONER OVER AN
AREA OF 14.66 HA N NANDIHALLI VILLAGE, SANDUR TALUK,
BELLARI DISTRICT VIDE LETTER DATED 07.08.2020 (ANNEXURE-
A). ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.2 TO PAY DAMAGES TO
THE PETITIONER FOR THE FINANCIAL HARDSHIP SUFFERED BY
THE PETITIONER ON ACCOUNT OF THE ARBITRARY ACTIONS OF
THE RESPONDENT NO.2 & ETC.
THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
Heard.
In this writ petition, the petitioner inter alia
seeks a writ of certiorari for quashment of Revocation
of Approval of Modified Mining Plan issued by Indian
Bureau of Mines dated 01.06.2021.
2. Facts giving rise to filing of this petition
briefly stated are that the petitioner was granted an
prospecting licence on 25.09.1993 for carrying out
prospecting operation over an area measuring 20.23
hectares of land at Nandihalli Village, Swamimalai,
Sandur Taluk, Belgaum District for a period of two
years. The petitioner completed the prospecting
operation and filed an application on 20.04.1994 for
grant of mining licence for iron ore in respect of land
in question within a prospecting period of three
months as stipulated under Section 3(1)(d) of Mines
and Mineral Development (Regulations) Act, 1957. In
view of the recommendation of the Technical
committee, State Government by notification dated
03.12.2019 granted the mining lease in favour of the
petitioner for a period of 50 years under
Section10A(2)(b) of the Act in respect of area
measuring 14.66 hectares in Nandihalli Village,
Sandur Taluk, Belgaum District.
3. Thereafter, a lease deed was executed in
favour of the petitioner on 20.04.2021 and was
registered on 21.04.2021. However, by an Amending
Act, the provisions of Section 10A(2)(b) of the Act was
incorporated in the Act with effect from 28.03.2021.
In view of the aforesaid provision, by the impugned
order, the Indian Bureau of Mines unilaterally revoked
the mining plan approval granted to the petitioner in
respect of the area in question. In the aforesaid
factual background, this petition has been filed.
4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner
submits that with reference to Section 10A(2)(b) of the
Act, which has been incorporated in the statute book
with effect from 28.03.2021, the mining plan approval
granted to the petitioner cannot be revoked. It is
submitted by learned Senior counsel for the petitioner
that the issue involved in the writ petition is squarely
covered by the decision of a division bench of this
court dated 27.05.2022 passed in W.P.No.1920/21.
On the other hand, learned Additional Government
Advocate has opposed the aforesaid prayer.
5. We have considered the rival submissions
made on both sides and have perused the record. For
the reasons assigned by division bench of this court
vide judgment dated 27.05.2022 in W.P.No.1920/21,
the impugned communication dated 01.06.2021 is
hereby quashed.
In the result, the petition is allowed.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
SS
