- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27009-DB WP No. 9653 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 9653 OF 2026 (GM-MM-S) BETWEEN: 1. SRI NARAYANA PUNCHAME S/O. KADIYA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT. 12-365/3(d)1, SANCHAYAGIRI HOUSE 4TH MAIN ROAD, B. MOODA VILLAGE JODUMARGA POST, BANTWAL TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 219 …PETITIONER (BY SRI DHANANJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT MANGALURU - 575 001 (CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT SAND MONITORING COMMITTEE) 3. THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVAN Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27009-DB WP No. 9653 of 2026 RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 4. DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY GROUND FLOOR, PRAJA SOUDHA PADIL, MANGALORE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575 007 5. SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY GROUND FLOOR, PRAJA SOUDHA PADIL, MANGALORE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 575 007 6. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER PUTTUR SUB-DIVISION, PUTTUR DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 201 7. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT NO.4, SUB DIVISION, PUTTUR DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 201 8. SRI THANIYAPPA S/O GOOJA AGED MAJOR R/AT NO.E-1-25, RAASTHOTTU MANE INDABETTU, BANGADY, BELTHANGADI TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 214 9. DISTRICT SAND MONITORING COMMITTEE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY OFFICE OF SENIOR GEOLOGIST PRAJASOUDHA, PADIL MANGALORE - 575 001 …RESPONDENTS (SRI K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO 7 & 9; SRI THARUN THARANATH POOJARI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-8) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27009-DB WP No. 9653 of 2026 DIRECTION TO QUASH THE SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS/ ENDORSEMENT DATED 02/01/2026 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NOS.5, 6 AND 7, VIDE ANNEXURES-A AND A1 IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO DECLARING THE PETITIONER AS 'INELIGIBLE' FOR THE SAND BLOCKS SITUATED AT NOOJI BALTHILA, PERABE AND ILANTHILA VILLAGES & 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 MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia impugning the scrutiny proceedings/endorsement dated 02.01.2026 [impugned endorsement] passed by respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7, whereby the petitioner was declared ineligible for grant of sand blocks situated at Nooji Balthila, Perabe and Ilanthila Villages. 2. Respondent No.1 had issued an e-tender notification dated 06.11.2025, inter alia, for grant of sand quarry lease in the villages of Nooji Balthila, Perabe and Ilanthila. The petitioner had furnished his bid pursuant to the said notification and also remitted Earnest Money Deposit [EMD] aggregating to `15,97,840/-. Respondent - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27009-DB WP No. 9653 of 2026 No.8 had also furnished a bid for the said sand blocks. The scrutiny committee comprising respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 – in the proceedings recorded on 02.01.2026 – found the petitioner to be ineligible for the grant of sand quarry lease on the ground that he was not a resident of the concerned taluk where the sand blocks were located. Simultaneously, the scrutiny committee found that respondent No. 8 was eligible. 3. The petitioner challenges the impugned endorsement on the ground that the requirement to be a resident of the concerned taluk is inapplicable. The petitioner states that the condition requiring the allotment of sand blocks to traditional sand-extracting communities was relaxed if there were no eligible bidders. He also challenges the decision to the extent that it declares respondent No. 8 eligible for the grant of the licence. It is stated that respondent No. 8 had submitted a no-due certificate, which was one of the conditions for eligibility. However, a demand for the prior period was raised against him immediately thereafter. This indicates that the no-due certificate furnished by respondent No. 8 was erroneous. 4. Rule 31-ZB (1) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 [the Rules] is relevant and is set out below: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27009-DB WP No. 9653 of 2026 "31-ZB. Disposal of Sand blocks available in IV, V and higher order streams through Tender-cum- Auction in Non-CRZ areas of Coastal Districts.- (1) In non-CRZ areas of Coastal Districts, viz. Uttar Kannada, Dakshin Kannada and Udupi Districts, sand blocks shall be allotted through tender-cum-auction amongst the traditional sand extracting communities to be identified and subject to the following conditions, namely.- (a) A person shall be resident of the concerned Taluk for not less than one year and to that effect residential certificate shall be obtained from jurisdictional Tahsildar. (b) The person shall furnish the document as proof of having engaged in extraction of sand in coastal area through manual methods for at least One year. (c) The person shall own a stockyard near the river bank or shall have an agreement with the owner of the land to that effect; and (d) Motor boats and dredger for removal of sand is prohibited." 5. In terms of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 31-ZB of the Rules, sand blocks available in IV, V and higher order streams in Non-CRZ areas of the Coastal Districts of Uttara Kannada, Dakshina Kannada and Udupi districts are required to be allotted through tender-cum-auction amongst "traditional sand extracting communities to be identified". It is the petitioner's contention that the said condition had been relaxed by a letter dated 28.04.2025. The English translation of the said letter is set out below: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27009-DB WP No. 9653 of 2026 "No.Ga Bhu I/U Ni (Kh.A.)/M.Vi./D.Ka/2025-26/2134 Office of the Director Department of Mines and Geology No.49, Khanija Bhavan, Race Course Road, Bengaluru Date: 28.04.2025 To, The Deputy Commissioner and Chairman, District Sand Committee, Dakshina Kannada District, Respected Sir, Subject: Regarding request for relaxation/waiver in rules to enable availability of more eligible bidders in the e-tender process of sand blocks in Non-CRZ areas within Dakshina Kannada District. Reference: Your letter No: Ga Bhu I / Hi Bhu Vi (Ma)/ Ka Ga Gu/ Sand / 2024-25 / 58373 dated: 12.03.2025. With reference to the above subject and the letter cited, regarding sand blocks in the Non-CRZ areas within Dakshina Kannada District proposed to be allotted through tender-cum- auction, it is requested to relax/waive the rules in respect of the following three points so that more eligible bidders may be available: 1. In the newly formed taluks of Moodabidri, Mulki, and Ullal, which were carved out from certain villages of Bantwal and Mangaluru taluks, bidders who submit a certificate from the concerned Tahsildar confirming a minimum residence of one year may be considered. 2. Traditionally, in coastal areas, bidders must have at least one year of experience in sand extraction. However, some bidders who previously held temporary permits of 3 months (No.01/02/003) or were granted temporary permits after obtaining CRZ clearance for removal of sand dunes for a period of 2-3 months have submitted only one such temporary permit, treating it as a one-year temporary permit. Therefore, they may - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27009-DB WP No. 9653 of 2026 have submitted only one temporary permit in the tender process. This aspect may be considered. 3. For sand blocks reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes that have already been notified and those to be newly identified, if no eligible bidders are available, relaxation may be given to the condition of "traditional sand mining". In such cases, if there is only one bidder, that bidder may be considered as eligible. Upon examination of the above: Regarding point No.1, as per Rule 31-ZB(18) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 1994, a certificate from the concerned Tahsildar confirming a minimum of one year of residence in the respective taluk must be submitted. Action may be taken accordingly. Regarding point No.2, in the case of temporary permits issued based on CRZ clearance, the validity period up to which the temporary permit has been issued may be verified, discussed, and decided in the District Sand Committee. The period of the temporary permit submitted by bidders may be considered accordingly. Regarding point No.3, as per Government Order No.CI-MMN- 189-2022 dated 14.12.2022, clause 10(d), if the total number of technically qualified bidders is less than three, the auction process shall be annulled. However, this shall not be applicable for the third and subsequent calls. Therefore, as stated above, sand blocks may be allotted through tender-cum-auction in accordance with Rule 31-ZB of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2021 and Government Order No.CI-MMN/189/2022, Bengaluru dated 14.12.2022. Yours faithfully, Director Department of Mines and Geology" - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27009-DB WP No. 9653 of 2026 6. It is apparent that the government had decided that if the total number of technically qualified bidders was fewer than three, the auction would be annulled. But this would not apply to the third and subsequent calls. In the present case, the impugned endorsement indicates that the invitation to tender has been annulled because there was no eligible bidder for Perabe village, and there were fewer than three eligible bidders for Nooji Balthila and Ilanthila villages. 7. The petitioner's contention that the condition that sand blocks be allotted only to traditional sand-extracting communities as stipulated under Rule 31ZB of the Rules is not applicable by virtue of the letter dated 28.04.2025 is not merited, as no such inference could be drawn from the contents of the said letter. 8. The condition regarding at least three bidders would be relaxed only in the case of a third and subsequent call. There is no material to indicate that the tender notification pursuant to which the petitioner had submitted his bid, was the third call. We are also unable to readily accept that such a relaxation would also have an import of excluding the conditions stipulated in clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Rule 31-ZB(1) of the Rules. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27009-DB WP No. 9653 of 2026 9. Admittedly, the petitioner, who is not a resident of the concerned taluk and the residency certificate certifying that he is a resident of B Mooda Village, Bantwal Taluk, for the past 15 years, would be of little assistance to the petitioner. 10. Insofar as the challenge to the eligibility of Respondent No.8 is concerned, it is not necessary for this Court to examine the same as the tender notification has been annulled. However, we consider it apposite to direct that the respondents shall consider the averments made in the petition regarding the eligibility of respondent No.8 for future tenders and take an informed view. 11. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE AHB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11