Karnataka High Court
H G Sudhakara vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 June, 2009
S_HvIh!§)'GA msrmcr. .... ..APiiELLAN'I' {_B'5&__Sii':' 85 KUMAR )% "-- DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, IN THE man comm ms' KARNATAKA AT BA2~1r3A;.i)__ré£~, ~ DATED THIS THE 24th DAY or» JUN?) ' 1% ' ' PRESENT' THE HON'BLE MR. P. D. DINAKARAf€,_ "c:H1I§é1;§.'%§5tJ%s'r:{:'%E~ » ' THE H()N'BLE p4R.Jus'r:€:E V'.-»G.SAfiHAH}*iE' 1 H G SUQHAKARA 3/ o'.G:Db;s:iwwDA.TA - ' ' AG«E{)~ ABOVUT.jv4-5"{EFxR*S, R] 0 ;;1osAI-';ALL1 =B1i_3ARAHALLI _HASA(§A_DE..F'OST, ,, AGUMBE HQBLI ,, "*T;5i1RTHAHALLi"*'rALUK, AND. : AA ; '»,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, M. S. BUIDLING, BANGALOTREE 1 2 THE DIRECFOR OF MINES ANS GEOLDGY KI-IANIJA BHAVAN, scale unit under the name and style "Sri * V. Unit" and the pctitioner made an:=,appfi§§giiidn the above said quarrying lea<s::__as lease within the stipuiatead the has been zenewcd by the ' ~-for of five years and petitioner licence to the third Iesponn No.3 Without applicatiofi following the procedure Concession Rulss rc1ec11a£ij:§111yViss:1'i'e.»iijV':§fitE;(§ffa;2ment on the very same day Le. 23.2.2007 gtafing the area whextin the petitioner is V' _ lease is coming under gomal the circular dated 5.1.2oo7;1o.4.2oo7, no kiaade and as such, the quarrying lease No.439 of the~p »é§i*£1ioncr cannot be mun-wed for a further period. It is avermed that in W.A.Noa.1353/2006 and 3313/2005 {Strict dated 18.1 1.2006, the Deputy Commissioncrs in V Huihe State were directed to iclentifjr all firm gomal and other ivesezved iands to cxsnsider whether their extent have to be K/% I 6 the Writ petition. Being aggrieved by the saidVT«:)11icr dismissing the wzit petition dated 12.2.2009, has pmferred this appeal. There is delay of 'A the appeal and having regard to théllavcrgnlfintfig V affidavit filed in support or the condoned by scparatfi order. ll T' ' 4. We have hea;rt1~._the 'appéamg for the appellant and Advocate appcaringlllbr the 3. ' 5._ . Lcmaiéfl caiinékzl lA"'z§ppca1'ing for the appellant ithlat--- the Single Judge has proceeded on Icasfltl in favour of the petitioner is not a ,g.~..;;aa; it is a revenue land and the respondent
hllve come to the conclusion that the said land is a
and even if it is a gomal land it is for the Deputy
‘V V _ léfiohllzmissioncr to identify and diver the land for other
Ilégased area in mspect of which quanying
purposes b9;S{2(i on the cattle population in the said area and
R/1
:.I:1z.£:-‘:$i; Ye;/No
Host: Ycxzj/£50
10
(Mining), Department of Mines and Geology, ‘for
passing fresh orders on the application ‘
quarxying lease No.439. Th: u
orders on the application for
pefition by evaluating the V£a§.1:£)ii(;ati-:A>.i1and””
strictly in accordance:
Sdf-
Clrzief Iustice
….. Sd/’I
JUDGE
,/
r