Classification of land as 'deemed forest' based on Supreme Court directions and state affidavits overrides claims of land being gomal land and justifies the rejection of quarry lease extensions.

Committee granted environmental clearances to the petitioner. Vide the Government Order dated 08.03.2019, the petitioner was granted quarry lease of the subject property in respect of the building stone for a period of twelve months for using the same in the project works. Accordingly, respondent No.3 - Senior Geologist, executed quarry lease No.1099, dated 06.09.2021 in favour of the petitioner for a period of twelve months. It is stated that the quarry lease was extended twice till the completion of the project work.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that it was awarded further work by the NHAI i.e., the work of " improvement to two lane with paved shoulder from KM-597.56 (Pavagada town limit) to KM-606.670 (Kirnguru) on NH-150A (Jewargi-Chamarajnagar Section) in the State of Karnataka on EPC mode (Job No:NH-150A-KNT-2023-24-997) [hereinafter referred to as the subsequent project] vide agreement dated 18.10.2024 and that the said work was to be completed by 21.10.2025. The petitioner made an application on 04.02.2025 under Rule 3B of the KMMC Rules to grant quarry lease/extend quarry lease No.1099 to enable successful completion of the subsequent project.

4. It is the contention of the petitioner that under Rule 8(5) of the KMMC Rules since the lease was already granted, there was no requirement for the opinion of various authorities for grant of extension of the quarry lease. However, respondent No.3 - Senior Geologist, on 13.03.2025 sought the opinion of the Deputy Conservator of Forests as to the status of the property, the lease of which was granted to the petitioner. The petitioner made requests to various other authorities namely, the Director of Mines and Geology as also respondent No.4 - District Task Force Committee [Committee] contending, inter alia, that there is no necessity to once again take the opinion of the various authorities for grant/extension of the lease. Respondent No.2 - Director of Mines and Geology, vide letter dated 24.05.2025 required the Committee to take a decision on the request made by the petitioner. The Committee in its meeting held on 06.05.2025, in view of the objections raised by the various departments, who had stated that their no objection in respect of the land in question (Sy.No.101/P1) having been withdrawn on the ground that the said land is a deemed forest, rejected the application of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same, the present petition is filed.

5. It is the contention of the petitioner that the property/land applied for by the petitioner is part of 50.29 acres of gomal land and the said land in Sy.No.101/P1 is a government gomal land and is not to be treated as a forest land. The petitioner also relies on various communications addressed by the various departments of the government to contend that the classification of the land in question as "deemed forest” is without any basis. It is also contended that since the quarry lease was already granted, having regard to Rule 8(5) of the KMMC Rules, there was no requirement of once again taking the opinion of the Deputy Commissioner of Forests and the revenue officials for grant or extension of the quarry lease. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks for allowing of the writ petition and granting the reliefs sought for.

6. Per contra, it is the contention of the learned Government Advocate that pursuant to the directions of the Supreme Court in the case of T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India and others : (1997) 2 SCC 267 the Government of Karnataka has filed an affidavit dated 11.1.2022 listing out a total extent of 3,30,186.93 hectares of land as a