Karnataka High Court
WP/22086/2026 of SRI M.B. ODEGOWDA, Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, on 30 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010490422026 NC: 2026:KHC:54249-DB WP No. 22086 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 22086 OF 2026 (GM-MM-S)
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 22086 OF 2026 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI M.B. ODEGOWDA
S/O. LATE SRI M.T. BASAVANAGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
PROPRIETOR
M/S NANDHI STONE CRUSHER
HOLDER OF MINING LEASE NO.110
R/AT BEVINAHALLI VILLAGE
UCHANGIDURGA
HARAPANAHALLI TALUK
VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT – 583 125
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI BHADRAVADI SIDDESWARA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES
KHANIJA BHAVANA
RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001
2.
THE DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
KHANIJA BHAVANA
Digitally
signed by
VEERENDRA
KUMAR K M
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001
3.
THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST
OFFICE OF THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT
7TH WARD, SADASHIVANAGAR
M.P. PRAKASH NAGAR, HOSAPETE
VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT - 583 201
4.
KARNATAKA STATE REMOTE SENSING
APPLICATIONS CENTRE (KSRSAC)
DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (E-GOVERNANCE)
DODDABETTAHALLI
MAJOR SANDEEP UNNIKRISHNAN ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 097
REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIRECTOR
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
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 APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR
DIRECTION,
QUASHING
THE
IMPUGNED
DEMAND
NOTICE
BEARING NO.6/2026-27/504 DATED 05.05.2026 (ANNEXURE-H), ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 & ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
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 impugning a notice dated 05.05.2026 issued under Rule 44A of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 [KMMC Rules], calling upon the petitioner to pay the total sum of `7,08,78,220/- as penalty for extracting excess and encroachment quantity totaling to 1009982 metric tons of mineral. The said demand is premised on the allegation that the petitioner has extracted and transported building stone in a licensed quarry area without payment of the requisite royalty.
3. The petitioner has been called upon to pay the stipulated penalty within a period of 45 days from the date of service of the notice.
HC-KAR
4. One of the contentions advanced by the petitioner is that the said demand is vitiated as it has been issued without following the principles of natural justice.
5. The learned Government Advocate fairly states that the present petition be disposed of by directing that the impugned notice be considered as a show cause notice. The petitioner may file a response to the same within a period of two weeks from date and the concerned authority shall pass a final order after affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.
6. In view of the aforesaid statement, no orders are required to be passed in this petition, except that the respondents would be bound down to the statement made on their behalf. We clarify that we have not examined the merits of the demand and nothing stated in this order should be construed as such.
7. We clarify that all rights and contentions of the parties are reserved including the petitioner's contention that the one time settlement [OTS] as contemplated under Rule 44-A of the KMMC Rules, is voluntary and at the option of the lease/licence holder.
HC-KAR
8. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE
KMV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1