SRINIVASA GRANITES Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 27th November 2015 passed by the second respondent cancelling the quarrying lease granted in favour of the petitioner and the order dated 27th August 2016 passed by the first respondent confirming the order passed by the second respondent.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that by a partnership deed dated 28th October 1993 T.Giriyappa, S/o.Thimmegowda and G.Dayananda, S/o. T.Giriyappa formed the partnership firm in the name of M/s.Srinivasa Granites. The firm has made an application on 9th March 1999 for quarrying lease under the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short, 'the said Rules of 1994'). The second respondent has granted the quarrying lease as per Annexure-C in favour of M/s.Srinivasa Granites. Subsequently, quarrying lease has been extended for a period of 20 years in the name of the partnership firm. The partnership firm was reconstituted by a partnership deed dated 10th August 2009 by inducting G.D.Balaji, S/o. G.Dayananda as one of the partners. To give effect to the arrangement made in the reconstituted partnership deed dated 10th August 2009 they have reconstituted the partnership deed on 9th July 2014 consisting of G.Dayananda, S/o.T.Giriyappa and G.D.Balaji, S/o.G.Dayananda.

(3.) On 28th April 2015 the second respondent issued a show- cause notice to the petitioner stating that there is a violation of Rule 19-A of the said Rules. Hence, sought for an explanation. Pursuant to the said show-cause notice, the petitioner has given a detailed reply as per Annexure-K dated 22nd June 2015. The second respondent, by order dated 27th November 2015 has determined the quarrying lease No.353. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed a revision petition before the first respondent. The first respondent, by order dated 27th August 2016 has confirmed the order passed by the second respondent. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, petitioner has preferred this writ petition.