- (1.) Leave granted. Heard counsel for the parties.
(2.) The appellant is canvassing the correctness of the judgment of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court allowing Writ Appeal No. 1035 of 1991 filed by the respondents herein (Director of Mines and Geology and the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology) and dismissing his writ petition. The learned single Judge had allowed the appellant's writ petition and directed the respondents to execute the lease deed in his favour in respect of 300 acres in Survey Nos. 20 and 21 of Kudagali village. The pink granite concerned herein is a minor mineral, the quarrying whereof is regulated by the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1969 framed under Section 15 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957.
(3.) The appellant applied on July 4,1980 for grant of a quarry lease in respect of pink granite in Survey Nos. 20 and 21 admeasuring 300 acres. On January 6,1981, a lease was granted to him in respect of 100 acres. At the instance of the appellant, a corrigendum was issued on June 6, 1981 stating that the area in respect of which the appellant has been granted lease shall be read as 300 acres. Before, however, a lease deed could be executed in favour of the appellant as required by the Rules, Rule 3(A) was introduced in the said Rules prohibiting the grant of mining lease in respect of granite to private persons with effect from July 2, 1981. In view of the said Rule, the appellant says, the respondents declined to execute a lease deed in his favour pursuant to the grant aforesaid even though the Senior Geologist submitted his survey report (on the basis of survey conducted by him on July 3, 1981) to the competent officer. (Incidentally, the survey report states that the appellant had chosen only 50 acres out of the extent granted to him).;