Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 34565 (KAR)

SRI D RAJENDRA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/21177/2026 · 2026-08-18

K S Hemalekha

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010469862026 NC: 2026:KHC:44095-DB WP No. 21177 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.21177 OF 2026 (GM-MM_S) BETWEEN: SRI D. RAJENDRA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O DASAPPA, DANAVAHALLI, CHAAKAARASANAHALLI POST, NARASAPURA HOBLI, KOLAR TQ. & DIST. - 563 133. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NATARAJA BALLAL A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 001 REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR. Digitally signed by C K LATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010469862026 NC: 2026:KHC:44095-DB WP No. 21177 of 2026 3. THE CHAIRMAN & DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DISTRICT TASK FORCE (MINES) COMMITTEE, KOLAR TALUK & DISTRICT - 563 101. 4. JOINT DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY, SOUTH ZONE, MYSORE - 570022. 5. THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY, OFFICE OF THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY, JILLA ADALITHA BHAVANA, KOLAR - 563 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS; ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDER OF THE RESPONDENT NO.4 BEARING NO.GA BU E/JUM NI/DA VA MY/REVISION-321-2016/2024-25/3124-3126 DATED 18.12.2024 (ANNEXURE-F) AND ALSO THE ORDER DATED 29.10.2014 BEARING NO.GABUE/KOKAAV/67AQL2014/RQL.473/2014-15/1107 OF THE RESPONDENT NO.5 (ANNEXURE-D) 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 - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010469862026 NC: 2026:KHC:44095-DB WP No. 21177 of 2026 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 an order dated 18.12.2024 as well as an order dated 29.10.2014 whereby the petitioner's application for renewal of the quarry lease was rejected. 3. The petitioner was granted a quarry lease on 10.06.2004 for extracting building stone for a period of five years. The said lease expired on 09.06.2009. Concededly, the petitioner was required to file an application for renewal of the licence 90 days prior to the said date, i.e., on 10.03.2009. However, the petitioner had failed to do so. The petitioner filed his application for renewal on 21.10.2014, i.e., more than five and half years after the last date for filing the application. Respondent No. 5 rejected the said application by an order dated 29.10.2014 on the ground that it was filed belatedly. The petitioner preferred a revision petition on - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010469862026 NC: 2026:KHC:44095-DB WP No. 21177 of 2026 12.02.2016 seeking revision of the said order, which too was rejected on 18.12.2024. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of the mitigating circumstances resulting from the illness of the petitioner's son, he could not file his application within the prescribed time. He submits that the petitioner's son has been suffering from Hirschsprungs disease since birth and was hospitalized. Therefore, it was for this reason that he was prevented from filing the application within the prescribed time. 5. However, we note that the petitioner's son was admitted to hospital on 21.05.2009 and was discharged on 06.06.2009. He was again admitted to hospital on 26.12.2011 and was discharged on 05.01.2012. The petitioner's son's illness since birth cannot possibly be considered as an explanation for not filing the application for renewal for over five and a half years. It is also significant to note that the petitioner's revision petition was also filed beyond the period prescribed. 6. In view of the above, we find no infirmity with the orders rejecting the petitioner's application for renewal of the quarry lease - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010469862026 NC: 2026:KHC:44095-DB WP No. 21177 of 2026 as well as the revision application. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. It is needless to state that if the petitioner files a fresh application, the same would be considered in accordance with law. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE CKL List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2