IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.19802 OF 2019 (GM-MM-S) BETWEEN:
SRI LOKESH BABU S/O GOVINDA REDDY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.21 1ST G CROSS, RPC LAYOUT SUBBANNA GARDEN MAIN ROAD BANGALORE – 560 040 (BY SHRI CHOKKA REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE – 560 001 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF MINES & INDUSTRIES VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE – 560 001 3. DIRECTOR AND COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY ... PETITIONER KHANIJA BHAVANA RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE – 560 001 4. SENIOR GEOLOGIST & COMPETENT AUTHORITY DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY RAMANAGARA DISTRICT RAMANAGARA – 560 062 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI V.G.BHANUPRAKASH, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE,) ---
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENT NO.4 SENIOR GEOLOGIST AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY TO GRANT AND EXECUTE A QUARRY LEASE TO EXTRACT ORDINARY BUILDING STONES WHICH IS A NON-SPECIFIED MINOR MINERAL, IN THE GOVERNMENT LAND BEARING SY.NO.99 BELAGUMBA VILLAGE, MAGADI TALUK OVER AN AREA 5 ACRES FOR DEEMING TO HAVE RECEIVED NOC FROM FOREST AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT THE QUARRY LEASE APPLICATION DATED 15.03.2006 FILED BY THE PETITIONER PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A THEREBY GRANT AND EXECUTE A CONDITIONAL QUARRY LEASE IMMEDIATELY FOR A PERIOD OF 30 YEARS IN TERMS OF NEWLY AMENDED RULE 8 (6) OF KMMC RULES EFFECTIVE FROM 12.08.2016 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.
2. A writ of mandamus is prayed for directing the fourth respondent to decide the application dated 15th March 2006 filed by the petitioner for grant of quarrying lease. The petitioner is relying upon the amendment carried out with effect from 12th August 2016 to the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short ‘the said Rules’).
3. A perusal of the averments made in the petition shows that after filling the application in the year 2006, the petitioner has slept over the matter for several years. The present petition seeking issue of a writ of mandamus is filed on 25th April 2019. In the petition, there are no averments made to show that the petitioner took any steps by reminding the Authorities to decide the application. Though the petitioner is relying upon amendment to the said Rules made with effect from 12th August 2016, even thereafter, there is a delay of more than two and a half years, as the present petition has been lodged on 25th April 2019. Thus, this is a case of gross unexplained delay of about thirteen years in approaching the Writ Court.
4. Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is always equitable and discretionary. Considering the aforesaid conduct of the petitioner, he cannot be allowed to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The petition is accordingly rejected only on the ground of delay.
Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE AHB