Point of Law: Power under the sub-rule (3) of Rule 6 of said Rules of 1994 can be exercised when a lessee commits breach of the said Rules of 1994 or of the terms and conditions incorporated in the quarrying lease

ORDER :

1. The submissions were heard on the last date.

Today, we have heard further submissions.

2. The petitioner was granted a quarrying lease on 12th January 2017 for ten years. The challenge in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to Annexure-M, which is an order purportedly made by the Senior Geologist by which the quarrying lease granted to the petitioner was cancelled. The cancellation was on the ground that the petitioner was carrying on quarrying operations near the residential buildings of Indian Reserve Battalion. It is stated that the staff of Morarji Desai Residential Minority Girls’ School was complaining that the school children were suffering from ill health due to dust and noise created by quarrying operations carried out by the petitioner. Annexure-M is purportedly based on the show cause notice dated 18th March 2019. The second prayer in the petition is for restoration of the lease.

3. There is a statement of objections filed by the State Government in which reliance is placed on the effect of quarrying activities carried on by the petitioner near the residential quarters of Indian Reserve Battalion and Morarji Desai Residential Minority Girls’ School. It is also stated that there is an overhead water tank of 5 lakh liters capacity situated very close to crusher operated by the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner firstly submitted that there is no power vesting in the Senior Geologist under the provisions of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short “the said Rules of 1994”) to determine the lease granted to the petitioner. His submission is that the impugned order is contrary to sub-rule (3) of Rule 6 of the said Rules of 1994 and the same has been passed in breach of the principles of natural justice. He submitted that the show cause notice dated 18th March 2019 is based on the proceedings of the District Stone Crusher Licencing and Regulation Authority meeting held on 18th August 2018 which have been specifically quashed in the earlier writ petitions filed by the petitioner and two others by an order dated 25th April 2019. Therefore, he submitted that no action could have been initiated on the basis of the said proceedings.

5. The learned Additional Government Advocate sought to draw support from the first proviso to Rule 45 of the said Rules of 1994 by submitting that the termination of lease is on specific grounds which are incorporated in the first proviso to Rule 45 of the said Rules of 1994. He submitted that quarrying activities of the petitioner have not only damaged the environment but the same pose a danger to the health of the occupants of the residential quarters of the Indian Reserve Battalion and the students of Morarji Desai Residential Minority Girls’ School. He submitted that, therefore, no interference is called for.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that apart from other submissions, it may be noted that, the first proviso of Rule 45 of the said Rules of 1994 was not on the Rule book when the impugned order at Annexure-M was passed. He urged that the power under the proviso can be exercised only when the holder of the lease commits an offence under sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short “said Act of 1957”).

7. We have carefully considered the submissions.

Rule 45 of the said Rules of 1994 as amended on 30th June 2020 reads thus:

“45. Termination of lease or licence held by an offender. -Where the holder of a lease or licence has committed an offence under sub-section (1) of section 21, without prejudice to the penalty for which the holder of a lease or licence is liable under that subsection, the Competent Authority may, after such enquiry as it deems fit, terminate the quarry lease or licence held by such person.

Provided that, where the Commissioner or Director of Mines and Geology, after consulting the State Government, is of opinion that it is e