Karnataka High Court
WP/28791/2026 of SRI. SHARANAGOPAL Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, on 29 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010631072026 NC: 2026:KHC:53906-DB WP No. 28791 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH 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.28791 OF 2026 (GM-MM_S)
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH 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.28791 OF 2026 (GM-MM_S)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SHARANAGOPAL
S/O. SANGANNA DESAI,
AGED 43 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. BELUR VILLAGE, NAVADAGI,
VIJAYAPURA-586214.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHIVALLI SHIVAYOGI YALLAPPAGOUDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2.
THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT
(MSME & MINES), ROOM NO.135,
1ST FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560 001.
3.
THE DIRECTOR & COMMISSIONER,
DEPT. OF MINES & GEOLOGY,
KHANIJA BHAVAN,
RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU,
BENGALURU-560 001.
Digitally signed by
MAHALAKSHMI B M
Location: High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
4.
THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST,
DEPT. OF MINES AND GEOLOGY,
VIJAYAPURA-585403.
5.
KARNATAKA STATE REMOTE SENSING
CENTRE (KSRSAC)
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
DOOARA SAMVEDI BHAVANA
MAJOR SANDIP UNNIKRISHNAN ROAD
DODDABETTAHALLI,
VIDYARANYAPURA,
BENGALURU-560 097.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 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 IMPUGNED NOTICE BEARING NO.
HIBHUVI/GABHUEE/VI.PURA/OTS/NOTICE-2026-27/213
DATED
20.05.2026 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT SENIOR GEOLOGIST
PRODUCED
AT
ANNEXURE-A,
IN
TERMS
OF
GUIDELINES
PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE DATED 09.03.2026
FORMULATED UNDER NEWLY INSERTED RULE 44-A OF THE
KMMC RULES 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
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.
HC-KAR
2. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the demand notice dated 20.05.2026 [impugned order] issued under Rule 44A of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 [KMMC Rules] calling upon the petitioner to pay a sum of `3,76,91,570/- as penalty. The said demand has been raised towards a one-time settlement [OTS] of the penalty for extracting 5,38,451 metric tonnes of building stone in excess of the quantity reported. The petitioner also sought issuance of directions to respondent No.4 for furnishing the documents, records and reports as requested by the petitioner in his reply dated 27.05.2026.
3. The petitioner states that he responded to the said notice by letter dated 27.05.2026. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned demand notice is vitiated as it has been issued without following the principles of natural justice.
4. The learned Government Advocate fairly submits that the impugned demand notice would be treated as a show cause notice, the petitioner's response to the same would be considered and the concerned authority would pass an appropriate order after affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.
HC-KAR
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE
MBM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4