Karnataka High Court
M/S Vijaya Durga Devi Minerals vs State Of Karnataka on 4 March, 2024
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:8990-DB
WP No. 29110 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. N.V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 29110 OF 2023 (GM-FOR)
BETWEEN:
1. M/S. VIJAYA DURGA DEVI MINERALS
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED
BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
KANAKARAO YEDIDA
S/O VENKAATARATNAM YEDIDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT
SY.NO.20/1A AND 20/1C
DINDADHAHALLI VILLAGE
HIREGUNTANUR HOBLI
Digitally signed CHITRADURGA -577 501
by AMBIKA H B ...PETITIONER
Location: HIGH
COURT OF (BY SRI LAKAMAPURMATH CHIDANANDAYYA, ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF FOREST,
ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT
M S BUILDING
BANGALORE-560 001
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:8990-DB
WP No. 29110 of 2023
2. PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST, ARANYA BHAVAN
MALLESWARAM
BANGALORE-560 055
3. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
CHITRADURGA DIVISION
CHITRADURGA-577 501
4. RANGE FOREST OFFICER
CHITRADURGA RANGE
CHITRADURGA-577 501
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S. S. MAHENDRA, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO INSIST UPON THE
PETITIONER TO OBTAIN FORM NO.29 FOR TRANSPORTING
THE BENEFICIATED ORE FROM THE FACTORY PREMISES OF
THE PETITIONER TO THE ULTIMATE BUYER OF THE
PETITIONER AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMNARY
HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING.
ORDER
Heard learned advocate Mr. Lakamapurmath Chidanandayya
for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate
Mr. S.S.Mahendra for the respondents.
NC: 2024:KHC:8990-DB
2. The petitioner, which is a Partnership Firm, has
established the Beneficiation Plant in the land bearing Survey
Nos.20/1A and 20/1C situated at Dindahalli Village, Hireguntanur
Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk. The Beneficiation Plant is used for
manufacturing of beneficiated ore by using iron ore mineral. The
petitioner purchases iron ore from different sources including the
forest lands. The petitioner will have to obtain Form No.27 under
Rule 145 of the Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969 for transporting the
iron ore mineral from mining lease area located in forest land.
3. By filing the present petition, the petitioner has prayed
for a direction against the respondent - authorities not to insist upon
the petitioner for obtaining Form No.29 for transporting the
beneficiated ore from the factory premises of the petitioner to the
place of ultimate buyer. It is further prayed to declare that such
insistence is illegal.
3.1 It is the case of the petitioner that it purchased the iron
ore mineral from Nadeem Minerals located in the forest land and
obtained Form No.27. The mineral was transported to the plant of
the petitioner. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though the
petitioner applied for Mineral Dispatch Permits, the authorities did
NC: 2024:KHC:8990-DB
not respond positive, but insisted upon Form No.29 for the purpose
of transportation.
3.2 It is the further say of the petitioner that it was pointed
out to the respondents that law is laid down on the aspect by this
High Court in Rai Bhahadur Seth Shreeram Narasingdas Private
Limited vs The State of Karnataka and others Writ Petition
No.56386 of 2017 decided as per order dated 19.03.2020.
However, the authorities stated that since the petitioner was not a
party in the said case, the benefit thereof would not be extended to
it.
4. In course of the hearing, when learned Government
Advocate for the respondents was confronted with the aforesaid
decision in Rai Bhahadur Seth (supra), he was entirely at his
receiving end. He was unable to deny that the issue is covered by
the said judgment.
4.1 Learned Government Advocate, however, submitted
that the decision in Rai Bhahadur Seth (supra) has been
subjected to challenge before the Supreme Court in Special Leave
to Appeal (C) No.13991 of 2020. He submitted, therefore, that
NC: 2024:KHC:8990-DB
since the decision is carried in appeal before the Supreme Court,
relief may not be granted.
5. In Rai Bhahadur Seth (supra), for the reasons stated
in the judgment, it was held that the respondents could not compel
the petitioner to obtain Form No.29 for lifting or removal of
beneficiated iron ore from its plant for supplying to its prospective
buyers. The submission on behalf of the Government was rejected
that the petitioner could not claim exemption from production of
Form No.29 because the Beneficiation Plant of the petitioner was a
private market.
5.1 In Rai Bhahadur Seth (supra), it is held in terms that
once the iron ore mineral is transported with Form No.27, there
would be no necessity to obtain Form No.29 for transportation and
that Rule 145 of the Karnataka Forest Rules does not empower the
forest officials to insist to obtain Form No.29.
6. The order dated 01.02.2021 by the Supreme Court in
the aforesaid Special Leave to Appeal figures on record. The order
expressly states that no interim order is passed. Therefore, mere
pendency of the Special Leave to Appeal will not be a good ground
NC: 2024:KHC:8990-DB
to deny the relief to the petitioner when the law laid down in Rai
Bhahadur Seth (supra) holds the field.
6.1 In view of the above decision in Rai Bhahadur Seth
(supra), the petitioner is entitled to grant of relief. It is directed that
the respondents shall not insist upon the petitioner for obtaining
Form No.29 for transporting the beneficiated ore from the factory
premises to the ultimate buyer so far as it relates to the iron ore
purchased from the State Government and pass has been obtained
in Form No.27 in terms of the relevant Rule of the Karnataka Forest
Rules.
7. The writ petition is accordingly allowed and disposed
of.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
THM
