Karnataka High Court
Smt. Jayalakshmi vs State Of Karnataka on 6 February, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:5497-DB
WP No. 2343 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
WRIT PETITION NO. 2343 OF 2025 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. JAYALAKSHMI
W/O MANJU
AGED ABOUT YEARS 47
SUBASHNAGAR, T. B. LAYOUT
NAGAMANGALA TALUK
MANDYA 571432
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI JAYANTH V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
AMBIKA H B REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
Location: COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES
High Court DEPARTMENT (MSME AND MINES)
of Karnataka
VIKASA SOUDHA
BANGALORE - 560 001
2. JOINT DIRECTOR
DEPT. OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
SOUTH DIVISION
NO. CA 4, 1ST D ROAD
I BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNANAGAR
MYSURU - 570 022
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:5497-DB
WP No. 2343 of 2025
3. SENIOR GEOLOGIST
DEPT. OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
MANDYA DISTRICT
KAIJA BHAVAN
VIDYANAGAR 1ST CROSS
MANDYA - 571 401
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT
ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR PASS ANY OTHER
ORDERS, DIRECTION QUASHING/SETTING ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 25.01.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT
No.2 DISMISSING HIS REVISION PETITION No.75/2022-23
(ANNEXURE-A) QUA HOLDING THAT THE MINIMUM AREA FOR
QUARRYING LEASE IS TO BE 2 ACRES & ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN
AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
N. V. ANJARIA
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)
This writ petition advances two-fold prayers. First is to set
aside the order dated 25.01.2024 passed by respondent No.2-the
Revisional Authority dismissing the Review Petition No.75 of 2022-
23. The rejection of the revision was on the ground that the
NC: 2025:KHC:5497-DB
application of the petitioner for grant of quarry lease did not satisfy
the requirement that the minimum area applied for quarrying lease
has to be 2 Acres. Consequential second prayer is made by the
petitioner seeking direction against respondent No.2 to reconsider
the revision application.
2. The application dated 28.03.2007 came to be filed by the
petitioner for grant of quarry lease in respect of land Survey No.2,
admeasuring 1 Acre at Devarahosuru Grama, Nagamangala
Taluka, Mandya. The application of the petitioner came to be
dismissed on 25.01.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred
revision application which was dismissed.
3. The only ground which weighed with the Revisional Authority
in dismissing the case of the petitioner was that the application of
the petitioner for quarry lease was for less than 2 Acres of area. It
was noted that the requirement in law was that 2 Acres of land
ought to have applied for grant of quarry lease.
4. Assailing the impugned order of the Revisional Authority, it
was submitted by learned advocate for the petitioner that the land
in respect of which the quarry lease is applied, though its total area
NC: 2025:KHC:5497-DB
is below 2 Acres falls within the cluster of land. It was submitted
that when the land applied for quarry is a part of a cluster, Rule
15A of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 would
came into operation.
5. Rule 15A of the 1994 Rules deals with the minimum area for
quarrying lease or licence or composite licence to be granted. In
its sub-rule (1), provision is made that no quarry lease or license
shall be granted with the extent less than the minimum extent
prescribed in Schedule II-A for the concerned mineral. In the
present case it is 2 Acres.
5.1 The Proviso to the said Rule 15A which reads as under,
"Provided that the State Government may, if
it is satisfied on the basis of proposed production
level, Geological or topographical conditions and
for the reasons to be recorded in writing, grant a
lease over an area less than minimum extent
specified in Schedule II-A. However, the
implementation of Environmental Management
Plan in such cases shall be in cluster approach."
5.2 The Proviso contemplates that however the implementation
of the said requirement shall be in cluster approach which would
mean that if the cluster of land has the extent beyond 2 Acres of
NC: 2025:KHC:5497-DB
area, the application would be entertained of a person who has
applied for less than 2 Acres in the said area.
6. Learned advocate invited attention of the Court to the map
which shows that the land applied for by the petitioner falls within
the cluster area (Annexure-B, page 23).
6.1 While aforesaid is the prima facie position emerging, learned
Additional Government Advocate Smt. Niloufer Akbar would submit
that the said aspect was never pointed out to the Revisional
Authority and had it been pointed out, it could have been
considered in proper light and in accordance with law.
7. In the aforesaid view, the proper course would be to remand
the proceedings to the Revisional Authority so that the Revisional
Authority could apply its mind to the aforesaid aspect and pass
appropriate orders in accordance with law. Resultantly, the petition
is partially allowed by directing that the proceedings of the Revision
Petition No.75 of 2022-23 shall be remitted back to the Revisional
Authority-the Joint Director, Department of Mines and Geology,
South Division, Mysuru.
NC: 2025:KHC:5497-DB
7.1 The authority shall reconsider the revision and pass fresh
order after giving opportunity to both the sides to raise all the
contentions, including the above contention.
7.2 The contentions including the above contention shall be
examined by the Revisional Authority in light of the facts on record
and take appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law.
8. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed anything on
the merits of the case of the petitioner. The observations and
statements made in this order shall not influence the decision of the
Revisional Authority.
9. The exercise of deciding the revision shall be completed
within two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of
the order by the Revisional Authority.
10. While passing the fresh order the Revisional authority shall
be entitled to consider all the relevant grounds which may be
germane to the decision in granting or refusing the request of the
quarry lease.
NC: 2025:KHC:5497-DB
11. The petition is partly allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid
terms.
Sd/-
(N. V. ANJARIA)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
(M.I.ARUN)
JUDGE
AHB
