Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s Shivashakthi Enterprises, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, seeking to set aside an order dated 28.03.2016 passed by the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Ramanagara (Respondent No.3), which rejected the petitioner's application for grant of a quarry lease for building stone (M-Sand) over an extent of 21 acres in Sy.No.30 of Chikkamudawadi Village, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara District. The petitioner also sought a direction to Respondent No.3 to reconsider the application. The rejection was based on the ground that the land was within 1 km of a reserved forest. The petitioner contended that the forest had been de-notified and that the petitioner had obtained prior environmental clearance from the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA). The respondents, represented by the Additional Government Advocate, opposed the petition. The Court examined the material on record and found that the forest in question had indeed been de-notified and that the petitioner had obtained environmental clearance. The Court held that the rejection was unsustainable in light of these changed circumstances. Consequently, the Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 28.03.2016, and directed Respondent No.3 to reconsider the petitioner's application afresh in accordance with law, without being influenced by the earlier rejection. The Court also directed that the reconsideration be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
Headnote
A) Mines and Minerals - Quarry Lease - Rejection - Reconsideration - The petitioner applied for a quarry lease for building stone (M-Sand) over 21 acres in Sy.No.30 of Chikkamudawadi Village, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara District. The Deputy Director of Mines and Geology rejected the application on 28.03.2016 on the ground that the land was within 1 km of a reserved forest. The petitioner challenged this order. The Court found that the forest had been de-notified and the petitioner had obtained prior environmental clearance. The Court set aside the rejection and directed reconsideration of the application in accordance with law, considering the changed circumstances. (Paras 1-5) B) Mines and Minerals - Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 - Rule 8 - Quarry Lease - Distance from Reserved Forest - The rejection was based on the distance from a reserved forest, but the forest had been de-notified. The Court held that the rejection was unsustainable and directed the authorities to reconsider the application afresh, taking into account the de-notification and the environmental clearance obtained by the petitioner. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the rejection of the petitioner's quarry lease application by the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology on the ground that the land was within 1 km of a reserved forest was sustainable when the forest had been de-notified and the petitioner had obtained prior environmental clearance.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 28.03.2016 passed by the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Ramanagara (Respondent No.3) is set aside. Respondent No.3 is directed to reconsider the petitioner's application for grant of quarry lease for building stone (M-Sand) over an extent of 21 acres in Sy.No.30 of Chikkamudawadi Village, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara District, afresh in accordance with law, without being influenced by the earlier rejection. The reconsideration shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Law Points
- Quarry lease
- Building stone
- M-Sand
- Rejection
- Reconsideration
- Prior approval
- Environmental clearance
- De-notified forest
- Distance criteria
- Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules
- 1994
