THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CHIEF JUSTICE AND C.M. POONACHA
M/S. SRI. MANJUNATHA SWAMY STONE CRUSHERS – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 28016/2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 28016 OF 2024 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
1. M/S. SRI MANJUNATHA SWAMY STONE CRUSHERS REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI N. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT NO.6, LOTTEGOLLAHALLI GANDHI VIDYALAYA ROAD RMV II STAGE, BENGALURU BENGALURU - 560 094 …PETITIONER (BY SRI RAVINDRA GAJANAN KOLLE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY Digitally ROOM NO. 320, 3RD FLOOR signed by VIDHANA SOUDHA VEERENDRA BENGALURU - 560 001 KUMAR K M Location:
High Court of 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT Karnataka DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES ROOM NO.135, FIRST FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001
3. THE DIRECTOR AND COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY NO.49, KHANIJA BHAVAN BENGALURU - 560 001
4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR AND REVISING AUTHORITY KHANIJA BHAVAN
1ST D CROSS ROAD, 'I' BLOCK RAMAKRISHNA NAGARA MYSURU - 570 022
5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
2ND FLOOR, ROOM NO.219 BEERASANDRA VILLAGE KOIRA POST, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110
6. SRI G. ERANNA S/O LATE GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/O CHANNASANDRA BYATHA POST HESARAGHATTA HOBLI YELAHANKA TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU - 560 089 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R-1 TO 5 SRI K.B. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-6)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING TO QUASH OR SET ASIDE THE GRANT, EXECUTION AND REGISTRATION OF IMPUGNED QUARRY LEASE DEED IN FORM-E AT No.2723 DATED 24.03.2024 IN FAVOR OF 6TH RESPONDENT, OVER AN AREA OF 1.33 ACRES IN GOVT. GOMAL LAND BEARING Sy.No.06 OF HALEKOTE VILLAGE, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA C.A.V. JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the grant, execution, and registration of the quarry lease deed [Form-E No.2723] dated 24.03.2023 in favour of respondent No.6 in respect of an area measuring 1.33 acres of Gomala land falling in Survey No.06 of Halekote Village, Doddaballapura Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District [subject land].
2. The petitioner further prays that directions be issued to respondent No.5 [the Deputy Director] to immediately grant, execute and register a quarry lease for the extraction of ordinary building stones over an area of 2 acres of government Gomala land falling in Survey No.06 of Halekote Village, Doddaballapura Taluk, pursuant to the petitioner’s application dated 19.08.2005.
3. The petitioner claims that his application for grant of quarry lease was required to be considered in priority over the application filed by respondent No.6. Therefore, the grant of quarry lease in Form-E No.2723 dated 24.03.2023 in favour of respondent No.6 in respect of subject land is liable to be set-aside and a quarry lease for 2 acres of the subject land is required to be granted in favour of the petitioner.
4. The petitioner states that he had filed an application dated 19.08.2005 in Form-AQL seeking the grant of a quarry lease for extracting ordinary building stones over an area of 2 acres falling in the subject land. The Deputy Director rejected the said application by an order dated 10.01.2008, on the ground that there was a direction not to grant building stone quarry leases in government Gomala, Gayarana and Hullubani lands, in terms of the letters dated 09.04.2007 and 30.04.2007.
5. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing a revision petit
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.