2023 Supreme(Kar) 1152
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Prasanna B.Varale, M.G.S.Kamal, JJ.
Jayashree Kirankumar Rathod – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 3198 of 2023 (GM-MMS)
Decided On : 31-08-2023
S.S.Mahendra, Advocate, Ravindra Gajanan Kolle, Advocate
The District Sand Monitoring Committee is not empowered to reject applications for sand quarry licenses; it can only recommend such actions to the competent authority as per the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules.
Headnote:
KMMC Rules - Sand Quarry License - Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 - Sections 31-R, 31-Z - The court interpreted the provisions of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, particularly Sections 31-R and 31-Z, to clarify the powers of the District Sand Monitoring Committee. It concluded that the Committee could only recommend the rejection of quarry license applications but lacked the authority to reject them outright. This interpretation influenced the court's decision to modify the Committee's rejection to a recommendation for rejection, directing the competent authority to make the final decision.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash the proceedings of the District Sand Monitoring Committee that rejected her application for a sand quarry license on her private land, despite having obtained necessary technical reports and No Objection Certificates from relevant authorities.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the District Sand Monitoring Committee did not have the authority to reject the application outright and could only make recommendations. The rejection was deemed erroneous as it did not align with the provisions of the KMMC Rules.
Issues: Whether the District Sand Monitoring Committee had the authority to reject the quarry license application or could only recommend its rejection.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the District Sand Monitoring Committee's powers were limited to making recommendations regarding the granting or rejection of quarry licenses, as specified in the KMMC Rules. The outright rejection of the application was beyond its jurisdiction.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed in part, modifying the Committee's rejection to a recommendation for rejection, and directing the competent authority to make a final decision on the application within eight weeks.
JUDGMENT
PRASANNA B.VARALE, CJ. - In this writ petition the petitioner has sought for quashment of proceedings of the meeting of the District Sand Monitoring Committee dtd. 20/12/2022 held under the Chairmanship of the Deputy Commissioner-respondent No.4 (Annexure-A) insofar as the same pertains to rejection of the application filed by the petitioner for issuance of a quarry lease and grant of Sand Quarry Licence over her Private Patta Land measuring 5 acres and for further direction to the Deputy Commissioner/respondent No.4 to send the recommendation to the respondent No.2 for grant of Sand Quarry Licence as per Rule 31-Z(1) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'KMMC Rules' for short).
2. It is contended by the petitioner that she is the absolute owner of the Patta Land measuring 10 acres situated at Suralikall Village, Hungund Taluka, Bagalkot District. That a technical report dtd. 12/5/2022 had been issued in Form-S by the Geologist and also a recommendation dtd. 1/10/2022 was issued by the Taluk Sand Monitoring Committee. That the said recommendation by the Taluk Sand Monitoring Committee was granted after receiving No Objection Certificates dtd. 5/8/2022 from Revenue Department, 22/8/2022 from Forest Department and 6/8/2022 from Senior Geologist, District Underground Water and dtd. 29/9/2022 by the Assistant Executive Engineer, Government of Karnataka Mining Irrigation and Underground Water Development respectively. That despite the aforesaid recommendations and No Objection Certificates, the District Sand Monitoring Committee in its meeting held on 20/12/2022 rejected the Quarry Licence application dtd. 28/4/2022 filed by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said rejection, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. Sri. Ravindra Gajanan Kolle, learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the provisions of Sec. 31- Z(1) of the KMMC Rules and the technical report and no bjection certificates referred to herein above submitted that there was no reason or justification in the District Sand Monitoring Committee rejecting the application of the petitioner, as it has no power under the KMMC Rules. He further submits that at the most the District Sand Monitoring Committee could only recommend either granting or rejecting the application. Alternatively, he submitted that even assuming that District Sand Monitoring Committee had indeed issued recommendation for rejection even the such recommendation would be erroneous considering the technical reports submitted by the concerned authority wherein petitioner land is stated not to be situated in the active river course or bed. Hence, seeks for allowing of the petition.
4. Per contra, Sri S.S.Mahendra, learned Principal Government Advocate for the State referring to Rule 31-R submitted that the District Sand Monitoring Committee is vested with the power to sanction/grant licence. When statute provides power and jurisdiction to sanction / grant it is presumed that it also possesses power to reject. He submits that technical report at Annexure-C in Form-S is not an absolute report and the same is issued subject to conditions. Recommendation made by the Taluk Sand Monitoring Committee upon the No Objection Certificates issued by the Revenue and Forest Departments and Department of Minor Irrigation and Ground Water are without reference to the said conditions contained in the Form-S. Therefore, he submits that petition requires to be rejected.
5. Heard and perused the records.
6. Provisions of Sec. 31-R of KMMC Rules, are extracted hereunder;
"31-R. Permission for quarrying and transportation of ordinary sand in river bed.-
(1)xxx (2)xxx (3) Powers and Functions of the District Sand Monitoring Committee.- The District Committee shall exercise and perform the following powers and functions, namely.- The District Committee shall.-
(i) Meet at least once in two months;
ii) take decision to grant, lease or licences for the sand blocks for sand quarryi