IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. L. NARAYANA SWAMY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.40627 OF 2018 (GM-MM-S) BETWEEN:
P. DINESH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O. GANGADHAR TILAK, NO.202, 5, NEAR M.S. RAMAIAH CITY, J.P. NAGAR, 7TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560 078. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.B. SHIVA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY, MINERALS DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA-562 101.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CHIKKABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA-562 105.
3. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPURA-562 105.
4. THE DISTRICT TASK FORCE COMMITTEE, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT, CHIKKABALLAPURA-562 105. REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.G. BHANU PRAKASH, AGA) ---
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A DATED 27.10.2017 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT; QUASH ANNEXURE-B IN SO FAR AS SL.NO.1 AND THE NOTES PERTAINING TO PARA (1) IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONER'S APPLICATION, VIDE PROCEEDINGS DATED 15.06.2017 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The application filed by the petitioner for grant of quarrying lease having been rejected by the respondent No.1 by way of endorsement dated 27.10.2017, the present petition is filed seeking to quash the said endorsement.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though he has complied with the mandatory requirements of the provisions of law, his application has been rejected unjustly by the respondents.
3. Sri V.G. Bhanuprakash, learned AGA for the respondents submits that there are justifiable reasons for rejection of the application of the petitioner and supports the impugned endorsement. It is further submitted that the petition be dismissed, since alternative remedy is available under Rule 53(2) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents.
5. Since there is alternative and efficacious remedy available under law, ordinarily writ petition would not be entertained.
6. In the circumstances, this petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy by filing a review petition.
In case, there is delay, the same shall be considered liberally by the revisional authority, taking into consideration the pendency of this writ petition.
Petition disposed of.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE ca