THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Vibhu Bakhru, CJ, K.S. Hemalekha, J
Mahesh Rai B.V. – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to demand notice due to lack of prior hearing. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. conversion of demand notice into show-cause notice to ensure procedural fairness. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 14.05.2026 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT SENIOR GEOLOGIST VIDE ANNEXURE-A DEMANDING RS.10,25,56,068/- AS FINE BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 44-A OF THE KARNATAKA MINOR MINERALS CONCESSION (AMENDMENT) RULES, 2026 AS ONE TIME SETTLEMENT (OTS) WITH PENAL PROVISIONS IN CASE OF NON-COMPLIANCE AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)
1. The learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the demand notice dated 14.05.2026 issued by respondent No.3 demanding an amount of `10,25,56,068/- as penalty in terms of the provisions of Rule 44A of the Karnataka
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.