IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 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.137 OF 2019 (GM-MM-S) BETWEEN:
SRI J R PAVANKUMAR AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O J RAVI R/AT JOOLAPALYA BAGEPALLI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT - 562 104.
(BY SRI PRAKASH B.S., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, (MSME & MINES) VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE DIRECTOR/ COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY, KHANIJA BHAVAN, R C ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.
3. THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ...PETITIONER DISTRICT OFFICES COMPLEX SIDLAGHATTA ROAD, CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 101.
(BY SRI.VIKRAM HUILGOL, HCGP) ---
...RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 02.06.2017 ISSUED BY THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY, CHIKKABALLAPUR R-3 REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER FOR GRANT OF QUARRY LEASE FOR QUARRYING BUILDING STONE OVER AN EXTENT OF 4.00 ACRES IN SY.NO.239 OF ACHAGANAPALLI VILLAGE, BAGEPALLI TALUK, CHICKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT. COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 02.06.2017 ISSUED BY THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY, CHIKKABALLAPUR HAS BEEN PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER In this Writ Petition, petitioner has challenged endorsement dated 02.06.2017 issued by respondent No.3 rejecting his application dated:21.07.2016 for quarrying building stone, which was submitted on 22.07.2016, and for a further direction to grant quarrying lease.
2. Shri Prakash B.S., learned advocate for petitioner submits that petitioner had submitted an application on 22.07.2016 and by the impugned endorsement, respondent No.3 has rejected the said application on the premise that ‘no objections’ were not received from Revenue and Forest Departments. He further submits that onus was upon the respondents to obtain required ‘no objections’.
3. Admittedly, the application was presented on 22.07.2016. With effect from 12.08.2016, all applications filed prior to said date in respect of which, ‘no objections’ were not received, stood ineligible for consideration.
4. Though the endorsement is issued in the year 2017, petitioner has presented this petition in the year 2019. No explanation is forthcoming for the delay. In the circumstances, we see no reason to entertain this petition. Hence, this petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed.
No costs.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE BSR