Anand Byrareddy, J.

1. Heard the Counsel for the petitioners and the Counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioners are questioning the validity of the Circulars issued by the State Government prohibiting the grant or renewal of quarry leases in gomal lands.

3. The facts arid circumstances leading upto this petition are as follows:,

The first petitioner claims to be a holder of quarry lease for winning, of granite (a minor mineral) granted by the State Government under the Karnataka Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the KMMC Rules). It is the said petitioner’s case that a lease was so granted from 13.9.2001, in a portion of Survey No.6 of Ravagodly Village: Bangalore South Taluk. As the permission for lease was about to expire, the petitioner had applied for a renewal of the quarry lease, as provided under the KMMC Rules, before the competent authority, by an application dated 24.5.2006.

4. The second petitioner claims to represent the interest of several quarry lease holders or applicants commonly with the first petitioner. It is the case of the petitioners that the first respondent had issued a Circular dated 24.2.1999 bearing No. RD 72 LGP