Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri Ananth vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|10 December, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO.35439 OF 2019 (GM-MM-S) BETWEEN:
SRI ANANTH SON OF KASHINATH SAVANT, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS, RESIDING AT: NO.678, 3RD CROSS, TILAKAWADI, BELAGAVI TALUK, BELAGAVI DISTRICT.
(BY SRI S.Y. SHIVALLI, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ...PETITIONER DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE RAOD, BENGALURU-560 001.
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY APMC ROAD, SANGAMESHWARA NAGARA, BELAGAVI-590 001.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI Y.H. VIJAY KUMAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AS PER RULE 32(11) OF KMMC RULE 2016 AND PURSUANT TO REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 22.06.2017 (ANNEXURE-E) CONVERT THE WORKING PERMISSION DATED 03.06.2016 ISSUED IN NO.21/2016-17 IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER INTO QUARRYING LICENCE AND FURTHER AS PER RULE 8A (2) OF KMMC RULES, 2016 DECLARE/HOLD THAT SAID QUARRING LICENCE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN GRANTED / EXTENDED FOR A PERIOD OF TWENTY YEARS FOR XTRACTING ORDINARY BUILDING STONE IN THE PETITIONER’S PATTA LAND BEARING NO.203/4 MEASURING 5 ACRES SITUATED AT TIRTHAKUNDE VILLAGE, KHANAPUR TALUK, BELAGAVI DISTRICT (ANNEXURE-D) AND ETC.
***** THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The plea of the petitioner is for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent No.3 to consider his representation dated 22-6-2017 vide Annexure-E.
2. Since the application is filed almost two years back and the respondents have not replied to the same, therefore, it is appropriate to direct them to consider the same. It is the discretion of the concerned respondent either to accept or reject it. However, the same has to be done in accordance with law. Hence, respondent No.3 is directed to consider the representation dated 22-6-2017, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Writ Petition is disposed off.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Rsk/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri Ananth vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
10 December, 2019
Judges
  • M Nagaprasanna
  • Ravi Malimath