Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18075 (KAR)

SRI NAVEEN LAKSHMAN v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/5612/2025 · 2025-03-05

M I Arun, N V Anjaria Cj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9530-DB WP No. 5612 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 5612 OF 2025 (GM-MM_S) BETWEEN: 1. SRI NAVEEN LAKSHMAN S/O MR. LAKSHMAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT NO. 497, 1ST FLOOR, 6TH MAIN DOMMALURU BDA LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 071. …PETITIONER (BY SRI BHAT GANAPATHY NARAYAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY VIDANA SOUDHA DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9530-DB WP No. 5612 of 2025 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND THE CHAIRMAN DISTRICT TASK, FORCE COMMITTEE TUMKUR DISTRICT, TUMKUR - 572 101. 4. THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY TUMKUR DISTRICT TUMKUR - 572 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY APPROPRIATE ORDER BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER APPLICATION DATED 17.11.2014 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND GRANT QUARRY LEASE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER PERTAINING TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY WITHIN TIME FRAME PERIOD, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9530-DB WP No. 5612 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) In the petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, direction is asked for against respondent-Authority to consider the application dated 17.11.2024 of the petitioner for grant of quarry lease in respect of Sy.No.123 admeasuring 10 acres situated at Byala Village, Madhugiri Taluk, Tumakuru District. 2. Learned advocate Mr. Bhat Ganapathy Narayan for the petitioner would point out that after making application, the petitioner has paid an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-. It is further submitted that the respondent herein has received No Objection Certificates from the Revenue Department, however, the Forest Department has not submitted a report. It is stated that thereafter the application of the petitioner came to be rejected on 29.08.2017. Thereafter, petitioner filed a petition which culminated into order dated 21.09.2017 whereby endorsement of the rejection dated 29.08.2017 was set aside. 3. It appears that the Forest Department has not so far decided on the grant of no objection to the petitioner or to refuse the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9530-DB WP No. 5612 of 2025 permission. Figures on record letter dated 01.10.2022 addressed by the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Tumakuru District, Deputy Conservator of Forest, Tumakuru regarding submission in connection with the issue of quarrying lease for excavating ornamental stone, as per the application of the petitioner. 3.1. The contents of the said letter would reflect that the authorities are in the process of examining the pros and cons of the request of the petitioner. In that view, this petition is not liable to be entertained, however, since the application of the petitioner is pending and petitioner has requested for grant of no objection from the Forest Department, it would be incumbent on part of the competent authority to consider the application of the petitioner and decide the same. 4. Therefore with limited observation that the respondent- competent authorities shall consider the aspect and take an appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law and on merits preferably within eight weeks. 4.1. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case nor has expressed any opinion on merits. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9530-DB WP No. 5612 of 2025 5. The petition is disposed of accordingly. The above direction will operate provided that the competent appropriate authority has not already considered and decided the application so far. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE VMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18