IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE The Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. M. Shyam Prasad Writ Petition Nos. 39990-39991/2018 (Gm-Res) Between :
SRI. SANTHOSH SON OF RATHI MOOLADI RESIDENT OF H.NO.3-78 SHIRVA VILLAGE UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT – 576 105 (BY SRI. K. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE) AND :
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING BANGALORE – 560 001.
2. THE GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, RAJATHDRI, MANIPAL UDUPI DISTRICT-576104.
... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SREENIDHI, AGA) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO DECLARE RULE 43(8) OF THE K.M.M.C. RULES AS ULTRA VIRES, ARBITRARY, VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 19 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND REPUGNANT/CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE 1954 ACT AND THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, OR ALTERNATIVELY READ DOWN RULE 43(8) BY LEAVING THE SAME TO THE DISCRETION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL COURT TO IMPOSE SUITABLE/REASONABLE CONDITIONS AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri K. Krishna, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the present writ petition is filed impugning the Rule 43 (8) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1994 on the ground that Rule 43(8) is ultra-vires the provisions of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, as well as on the ground that the Rule is repugnant to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, he has instructions to withdraw the challenge to the Rules; accordingly, he may be permitted to withdraw the challenge to the Rules. If the challenge to the Rules is withdrawn, and the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 14.08.2018 passed on an application filed under Section 457 of Code of Civil Procedure, the appropriate recourse for the petitioner would be to impugn such order in a properly instituted revision petition. Therefore, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate revision petition impugning the order dated 14.08.2018 in CC No.2469/2018, the present writ petitions are disposed of.
The office is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned order dated 14.8.2018 to the learned counsel for the petitioner after obtaining the photocopy thereof.
Sd/- Judge SA