IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO.49687 OF 2019 C/W WRIT PETITION NO.49685 OF 2019 (GM-MM-S) BETWEEN:
M/S. PRABHAT GRANITES PVT. LTD. HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.6/1, 1ST FLOOR, FLAT NO.B1 DIVYA RESIDENCY, 13TH ‘A’ CROSS JAYANAGAR 2ND BLOCK BENGALURU – 560 011 REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR T. PRASANNA GOWDA ... PETITIONER IN WP.No.49687/2019 M/S.R.C.INDIA NO.179, 1ST FLOOR 6TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN CHAMARAJPET BENGALURU-560 018 REP. BY ITS PARTNER SRI S.NIJALINGE GOWDA …PETITIONER IN WP.No.49685/2019 (BY SRI SHIVA KUMAR K.B., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE SECRETARY (MSME & MINES) COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU – 560 001 2. THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY NO.49, KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY 1ST FLOOR PANCHAYAT BHAVAN RAMANAGARA-562 159 ... RESPONDENTS COMMON (BY SRI Y.H. VIJAY KUMAR, PRL. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) ---
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE FIRST AND SECOND RESPONDENTS TO ISSUE SUPPLEMENTARY LEASE DEED DEPICTING THE PERIOD OF QUARRYING LEASES DATED 27.08.2014 (ANNEXURE-A) FROM 12.10.1999 TO 11.10.2029 IN WP.NO.49687/2019 AND DATED 16.08.2012 (ANNEXURE-A) FROM 12.10.1999 TO 11.10.2029 IN WP.NO.49685/2019 AND ETC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER On the last date, our attention was invited to sub-rule(2) of Rule 8-A of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short ‘the said Rules, 1994’).
2. The learned Principal Government Advocate states that the State has no objection for executing a lease for a period of 30 years from the date of the original grant. However, he submits that certain conditions will have to be imposed in the lease.
3. At this stage, we need not going to the question about the conditions which can be imposed, if any.
4. The learned Principal Government Advocate states that a period of eight weeks may be granted to execute a lease considering the code of conduct. However, we find that under sub-rule(2) of Rule 8A of the said Rules, 1994, the extension of lease is automatic and therefore, the code of conduct will not come in the way of the State Government in executing the lease. Accordingly, we dispose of the petitions by passing the following order:
i) We direct the State Government to execute a lease in accordance with sub-rule(2) of Rule 8-A of the said Rules, 1994 within a period of one month from the date on which this order is available on website;
ii) We make it clear that we have made no adjudication on the conditions, if any, which the State Government proposes to impose. The question of considering the same will arise only if the petitioner is aggrieved by any of the conditions, which may be incorporated in the lease;
iii) We direct the petitioner to produce the original registered lease in the office of respondent No.2 within a period of one week from the date on which this order is available on the website;
iv) If the petitioner produces the registered lease, the State Government will consider whether the same can be re-registered for the extended period or whether a fresh lease will have to be executed;
v) Subject to what is observed above, the petitions are disposed of with above directions.
Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE LB