- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32791-DB WP No. 22267 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI WRIT PETITION NO. 22267 OF 2025 (GM-MM-S) BETWEEN: 1. MAVEN FOREVER PVT. LTD SHREYAS 3 TEMPLE STREET 10TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU - 560 003 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR VENKATESH R S/O LATE RAMACHANDRA RAO …PETITIONER (BY SMT. JYOTHI S. KEMPAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI G.S. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32791-DB WP No. 22267 of 2025 3. SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 201. 4. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O M.N. NARAYANAPPA NEHARUNAGARA, 2ND CROSS SAGARA TOWN SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 401. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R-1 TO 3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT No.3 TO CONSIDER AND ACT UPON THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.06.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-A & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. Issue notice. 2. Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32791-DB WP No. 22267 of 2025 3. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia praying that their representation dated 14.06.2025 requesting that permits issued to respondent No.4 be withheld, has not been considered. The petitioner states that respondent No.4 has engaged the petitioner for carrying on quarrying operations. It is the petitioner's allegation that respondent No.4 has been diverting excavated material to third parties by obtaining transport permits, without its knowledge. 4. The dispute appears to be a private dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.4. However, it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the diversion of material, is contrary to law. 5. In the aforesaid backdrop, without going into the said allegation, we consider it apposite to dispose of the present petition by requesting the concerned authorities to consider the petitioner's representation, in accordance with law. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE KS