- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48082-DB WP No. 2023 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 2023 OF 2024 (GM-MM_S) BETWEEN: M/S. KADAMBA ASSOCIATES A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI C H MARUTHI KUMAR, S/O LATE S HANUMANTHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, BHARATH PETROLEUM BUNK, NEAR B H ROAD, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TOWN, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 104. …PETITIONER (BY MS. KUSUMA R PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. LAKAMAPURMATH CHIDANANDAYYA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRERTARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, (SSI, TEXTILES AND MINES) VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560 001. Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48082-DB WP No. 2023 of 2024 2. THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, KHANIJA BHAVAN, SPOORTHI LAYOUT, BADDIHALLI RING ROAD, TUMKUR - 572 104. 4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, SOUTH ZONE, MYSORE - 570 016. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN PASSING OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06/01/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A FOR GRANT OF QUARRY LEASE IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY AS PER CIRCULAR DATED 11/09/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-H, ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTIONS IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06/01/2024 BEARING NO.DMG/DDT/QLA- 104/2010-11/2023-24/5708 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER FOR GRANT OF QUARRY LEASE IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY AND 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. POONACHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48082-DB WP No. 2023 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an endorsement dated 06.01.2024, whereby the petitioner's request for considering its application for grant of quarry lease was rejected on the ground that there was no provision in the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession [Amendment] Rules, 2023 for considering the said application. The petitioner also impugns an order dated 29.09.2018, passed by the respondent No.4, whereby its Revision Petition [being Revision Petition No.3/2018-19] against an order dated 09.07.2013, rejecting petitioner's application for grant of quarry lease was rejected. 2. The petitioner had applied for a mining lease for mining the minor mineral, steatite, for a period of 10 years over land to an extent of 15 Acres falling in Survey Nos.30 and 31 of Shingenahalli Village, Tiptur Taluk, Tumakuru [subject land]. The said application was rejected by an order dated 09.07.2013, on the ground that the subject land was not free for grant of quarry lease as it was overlapping with the applied area of other applicants. The - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48082-DB WP No. 2023 of 2024 petitioner being aggrieved by the same, filed a Revision Petition before respondent No.4. The said Revision Petition was filed on 26.05.2018 under Rule 53(4) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994. As is apparent, the said Revision Petition was filed after an inordinate delay of almost four years and ten months. 3. The said Revision Petition was rejected by the impugned order dated 18.09.2018 ( the said order is also dated 29.09.2018, which date is affixed by a rubber stamp) on two grounds. First that the Revision Petition had been filed after a delay of four years and ten months. Second, that the competent officer had furnished information to the effect that it overlaps Application No.1214 AML 2005 dated 05.11.2005 and therefore, the subject land was not available. 4. The petitioner did not take any immediate steps to assail the said order. After a lapse of almost five years, the petitioner sent a letter dated 30.10.2023, once again requesting for consideration of the application which was rejected on 09.07.2013. The petitioner sought to support the said application on the ground that the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48082-DB WP No. 2023 of 2024 applications for grant of lease of land, which were overlapping with the subject land in the petitioner's application had since been withdrawn. 5. As noticed above, the said request was rejected in terms of the impugned endorsement dated 06.01.2024, on the ground that there was no provision under the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2023 for reconsidering the said application. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in terms of Rule 8-B of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994, all applications received for grant of lease prior to date of commencement of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2016 would become eligible, including in respect of minerals which were reclassified as minor minerals. 7. It is the petitioner's case that by virtue of the said amendment which came into force with effect from 17.03.2023, the petitioner's application for quarry lease stands resurrected. It is also contented that the said application had been kept pending. This contention is - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48082-DB WP No. 2023 of 2024 premised on observations made by the Revisionary Authority. However, we find no merit in the aforesaid contention. 8. The petitioner also sought to contest the objection that the applications stood closed by virtue of an order dated 09.07.2013. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contented that the order dated 09.07.2013 was not communicated to the petitioner. However, the rejoinder filed clearly states that the said order was communicated. This is also obvious from the fact that the appellant had preferred a Revision Petition assailing the said order. 9. We also note that the petitioner's Revision Petition was not rejected on the ground that it had become ineligible by virtue of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2016 which came into effect from 12.08.2016 but on substantive grounds, namely, that the subject land was overlapping with the applied area covered under another application [1214 AML 2005 dated 05.11.2005]. Thus, the contention that the petitioner's application continued to remain pending is erroneous. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48082-DB WP No. 2023 of 2024 10. We find no infirmity with the impugned endorsement dated 06.01.2024, rejecting the petitioners request for consideration of its application that stood rejected on 09.07.2013. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE BS/nd List No.: 2 Sl No.: 0