M/S Naagamale Stone Crushers And M ... vs The State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 6376 Kant

                                              -1-
                                                      NC: 2023:KHC:32303-DB
                                                      WP No. 11544 of 2023




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

                                           PRESENT
                   THE HON'BLE MR. PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                             AND
                           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
                         WRIT PETITION NO. 11544 OF 2023 (GM-MM-S)


                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    M/S NAAGAMALE STONE CRUSHERS AND
                         M SAND UNIT
                         A PARTNERSHIP FIRM
                         REPRESENTED BY ITS
                         MANAGING PARTNER SMT. HEMA N
                         W/O BASAVARAJU
                         AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
                         HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.917
                         KHB COLONY, CHIKKAMANDYA KERE
                         MANDYA DISTRICT-571101
                                                              ...PETITIONER
Digitally signed
by AMBIKA H B
                   (BY SRI LAKAMAPURMATH CHIDANANDAYYA, ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                   AND:

                   1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
                         REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
                         TO THE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND
                         COMMERCE, SSI TEXTILES AND MINES
                         VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001
                           -2-
                                  NC: 2023:KHC:32303-DB
                                  WP No. 11544 of 2023




2.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     REPRESENTED BY THE
     ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY
     DEPARTMENT OF FOREST
     GOVERNMENT OF KARNAKATA
     VIDHANA SOUDHA
     BENGALURU-560001

3.   THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF
     FORESTS FOR THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     DEPARTMENT OF FOREST
     ARANYA BHAVAN, MALLESHWARAM
     BENGALURU-560055

4.   THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS
     MANDYA SUB DIVISION
     DEPARTMENT OF FOREST
     MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA-571401

5.   THE DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
     THE DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
     KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD
     BENGALURU-560001

6.   THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST
     THE DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
     VIDYA NAGAR, FIRST CROSS
     MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA-571401
                                       ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMMUNICATION PASSED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT TO 6TH RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-A,
INFORMING THAT THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY APPLIED BY THE
PETITIONER IS A DEEMED FOREST AND ETC.
                                       -3-
                                                NC: 2023:KHC:32303-DB
                                                WP No. 11544 of 2023




     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                                 ORDER

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to

the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in

W.P.No.14466/2022 dated 28.07.2022.

2. The submission of the learned counsel for the

petitioner is that the petition is similarly circumstantial, and as

this Court found, the communication, though it was

between two officers, namely, the Deputy Conservator of

Forests, Mandya Division, Mandya, to the Licensing Authority,

namely, the Senior Geologist, Department of Mines and

Geology, Mandya District, the same is in violation of the law

laid down by a Division Bench of this Court, vide order dated

12.06.2019 passed in W.P.No.54476/2016 c/w

W.P.No.51135/2016 in the case of DHANANJAY VS. STATE

OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS and therefore, held that the

communication cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the petition

was partly allowed.

NC: 2023:KHC:32303-DB WP No. 11544 of 2023

3. The communication in the present matter is at

Annexure-A. As the communication runs on the same lines as it

was in W.P.No.14466/2022, we see no reason to take a

different view than the view adopted by the Division Bench in

W.P.No.14466/2022 dated 28.07.2022. Accordingly, the

petition is allowed and the impugned communication at

Annexure-A is quashed and set aside.

4. We further direct the concerned Competent Authority

to consider the application made by the petitioner for grant of

quarrying licence afresh in the light of the judgment of this

Court in the case of DHANANJAY (supra) and take

appropriate decision within a period of two months from

the date a copy of the order is produced before the

Competent Authority.

5. We further make it clear that while considering the

application afresh, the concerned Authority will have to

consider whether the subject land is "Forest" or "Forest Land"

as laid down in the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the

case of T.N.GODAVARMAN THIRUMULKPAD VS.UNION

OF INDIA AND OTHERS.

NC: 2023:KHC:32303-DB WP No. 11544 of 2023

6. It is needless to further observe that if the concerned

Authority finds that the land is a "Forest" or "Forest Land",

licence or extension of licence cannot be granted unless the

consent of the Central Government is obtained as per Section 2

of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The decision so taken

shall be communicated to the petitioner.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

KPS