ORDER :

1. Heard the submissions of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent, the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent.

FACTUAL ASPECTS:

2. For the purpose of deciding the controversy involved in the petition, a brief reference to the factual aspects will be necessary.

3. The petitioner is claiming to be the owner of a patta land more particularly described in the petition. He applied under sub-rule (1) of Rule 32 of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short “the said Rules of 1994”) for grant of a permission for quarrying granite stone. On 14th January 2016, a work order was issued to the petitioner for recommencing the stone quarrying operation on the patta land in accordance with sub-rule (1) of Rule 32 of the said Rules of 1994. The work order was in respect of a land in Herandyapanahalli Village, Kanakapura Taluk, District Ramanagara. As noted in the said work order, permissions and clearances we