IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO.50493 OF 2018 (GM-MM-S) BETWEEN:
M/S. SADIYA GRANITES BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI KHASIM KHAN S/O MAHABOOB BASHA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/O NEAR SADRU KHAN SAW MILL POLICE LINE ROAD, MILLERPET BELLARY DISTRICT – 583 101 (BY SHRI KALEEMULLAH SHARIFF, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (M.S.M.E. & MINES) COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPT. VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU – 560 001 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001 ... PETITIONER 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR MINES AND GEOLOGY BELLARY – 583 101 (BY SHRI V.G.BHANUPRAKASH, AGA) ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE DIRECTIONS TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION DATED 10.06.2004 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND FURTHER REPRESENTATIONS DATED 24.05.2017 GIVEN TO RESPONDENT NO.1 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F1 AND REPRESENTATION DATED 24.05.2017 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F2 AND THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22.06.2018 GIVEN TO 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-H BY ISSUING A WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
2. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that notwithstanding the compliances made by the petitioner, the application made by the petitioner in the year 2004 for grant of quarrying lease is pending. He invited our attention to the requisition issued by the Deputy Director on 28th February / 5th March 2018 calling upon the petitioner to submit the sketch of the area. He submitted that the sketch was submitted as indicated in the letter dated 22nd June 2018.
3. The learned Additional Government Advocate states that now, Rule 8-B of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short ‘the said Rules of 1994’) will apply and the application cannot be considered.
4. The question whether sub-rule (1) of Rule 8-B of the said Rules of 1994 applies or not, will depend upon the fact whether the case is covered by any of the exceptions set out under sub- rule (2) of that Rule and therefore, while deciding the application made by the petitioner all these issues can be considered by the concerned Authority. Accordingly, we direct the second respondent to decide the application made by the petitioner for grant of mining lease in accordance with law and within a period of two months from today.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE AHB