- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33140-DB WP No. 19445 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.19445 OF 2026 (GM-MM_S) BETWEEN: RAGHAVENDRA RAMESH NAIK AGED 31 YEARS, PROPRIETOR OF MAHALASA CONSTRUCTIONS, HAVING ITS UNIT AT 173/7+8A GANIKOPPA VILLAGE, BAILHONGAL TALUK AND DISTRICT BELAGAVI R/O. PLOT NO.980, MAHALASA NIWAS, MAHAVEER NAGAR, UDYAMBAG, BELAGAVI- 590008. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARJUN A. HEBBAR, ADVOCATE, MS. ADITI P. GOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI GOUDAR PRASHANTH FAKEERAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR/ SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, KHANIJA BHAVANA, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001. Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33140-DB WP No. 19445 of 2026 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY DISTRICT: BELAGAVI BAUXITE ROAD, KUMARSWAMY LAYOUT, BELAGAVI-590019. 4. KARNATAKA STATE REMOTE SENSING APPLICATIONS CENTRE, (KSRSAC) DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (E-GOVERNANCE), OFFICE AT DOORA SAMVEDI BHAVANA, MAJOR SANDEEP UNNIKRISHNAN ROAD, DODDABETTAHALLI, BENGALURU-560097 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, DIRECTION OR ORDER QUASHING THE IMPUGNED DEMAND NOTICE BEARING GABHUE/UNI/BEVI/OTS-NOTICE-2026- 27/1170 DATED 18/05/2026 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-A 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 MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning a notice dated 18.05.2026 issued under Rule 44A of the Karnataka - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33140-DB WP No. 19445 of 2026 Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 [KMMC Rules], calling upon the petitioner to pay a sum of `8,02,13,350/- as penalty for extracting excess and encroachment quantity totaling to 7,37,657 metric tons of mineral. 3. The petitioner is also called upon to visit the concerned office (Office of the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology) within a period of 7 days along with appropriate documents regarding the penalty amount and for settlement of the matter. However, the petitioner has also been called upon to pay the stipulated penalty within a period of 6 months from the date of service of the notice. The notice also sets out that the petitioner is also permitted to pay the penalty in four equal installments with one installment due every 45 days. 4. One of the contentions advanced by the petitioner is that the said demand is vitiated as it has been issued without following the principles of natural justice and despite the petitioner responding by letter dated 17.06.2026 to the demand notice, the same has not been considered. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33140-DB WP No. 19445 of 2026 5. The learned Government Advocate fairly states that the present petition be disposed of by directing that the impugned notice be considered as a show cause notice. He states that the petitioner's response would be considered and an order would be passed after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. 6. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of, directing the respondents are bound down to the statement made on their behalf. The impugned order shall be considered as a show cause notice and appropriate orders would be passed after following the principles of natural justice. 7. We clarify that all rights and contentions of the parties are reserved including the petitioner's contention that the one time settlement [OTS] as contemplated under Rule 44-A of the KMMC Rules, is voluntary and at the option of the lease/licence holder. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE MBM/List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12