Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

High Court of Karnataka Decides Batch of Writ Petitions Challenging Forest Development Tax Notification

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
Admin
2026-08-02 21:30:42
  • 5
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010005572011_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (KAR) (12) 21

Writ Petition No. 2642/2009 c/w Writ Petition Nos. 44793/2013, 13595/2008, 13516/2008, 13654/2008, 13803/2008, 14157/2008, 14802/2008, 30927/2008 and other connected matters

2015-12-03

Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, Acting Chief Justice, B.V. Nagarathna

K. Raghavacharyulu, Udaya Holla, K.N. Phanindra, D.L.N. Rao, L.M. Chidanandayya, K.N. Srinivasa, Ravivarma Kumar, A.S. Ponnanna, Y.H. Vijay Kumar

National Mineral Development Corporation Limited (NMDC Ltd.)

State of Karnataka, Department of Forest, Ecology and Environment, and Another

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions challenging the validity of Government of Karnataka notification dated 16.08.2008 and consequent demand notices for forest development tax under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963.

Remedy Sought

To quash the impugned notification and demand notices, and for a declaration that Section 98A of Karnataka Forest Act does not apply to Central Government corporations.

Filing Reason

The petitioners, being mining companies, firms, and individuals, were aggrieved by the notification imposing forest development tax on mining activities in forest areas.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India, 1950: Article 246, Entry 54 of List I, Seventh Schedule
  • Karnataka Forest Act, 1963:
  • Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980:
  • Karnataka Forest Act, 1993: Section 98A
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
forest development tax Karnataka Forest Act mining notification constitutional validity forest conservation

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Decides Batch of Writ Petitions Challenging Forest Development Tax Notification 2026-08-02 21:30:42
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appellant's Second Appeal in Property Encroachment Dispute. Concurrent findings of fact regarding identification of suit plot based on sale deed boundaries and Commissioner's report upheld. 2026-08-02 21:30:42
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition acquittal natural justice murder compensation burden of proof benefit of doubt limitation Article 226 circumstantial evidence
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

Bombay High Court at Goa Dismisses Review Petition in Partition Suit Impleadment Case — ...

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness and La...

Supreme Court Hears Appeals Against Madras High Court’s Setting Aside of Alienations and...

Supreme Court Hears Appeals on Permanent Establishment of Formula One World Championship L...

Supreme Court Interprets Scope of 'Child' under POCSO Act in Appeal Concerning Mentally Ch...

Supreme Court Hears Appeals Against High Court Decrees in Malankara Church Disputes. Rival...

Supreme Court Directs State Governments to Implement National Food Security Act, 2013 Mand...

Lost Your Password?