Karnataka High Court
WP/27210/2026 of SRI GOUTHAM Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 25 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010607122026 NC: 2026:KHC:53139-DB WP No. 27210 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH 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.27210 OF 2026 (GM-MM_S)
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH 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.27210 OF 2026 (GM-MM_S)
BETWEEN:
SRI GOUTHAM
S/O PUNDALIKARAO CHINCHOLI,
AGED 55 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O 1-949/73-96, OLD JEWARGI ROAD,
SADASHIVANAGAR,
CJ NAGAR COLONY,
KALBURGI - 585 102.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHIVALLI SHIVAYOGI YALLAPPAGOUDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
BENGALURU - 560001.
2.
THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT
(MSME & MINES) ROOM NO.135,
1ST FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560001.
3.
THE DIRECTOR & COMMISSIONER
DEPT. OF MINES & GEOLOGY,
KHANIJA BHAVAN,
Digitally signed by
MAHALAKSHMI B M
Location: High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU,
BENGALURU - 560001.
4.
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR & COMPETENT AUTHORITY, DEPARTMENT OF MINES & GEOLOGY, NO.01, ATAL BIHAR VAJPAYE LAYOUT, KOTNOOR(D), KALBURGI - 585102.
5.
KARNATAKA STATE REMOTE SENSING
CENTRE (KSRSAC)
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
DOOARA SAMVEDI BHAVANA
MAJOR SANDIP UNNIKRISHNAN ROAD
DODDABETTAHALLI,
VIDYARANYAPURA,
BENGALURU - 560097.
…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.GHABHUEE/UNIKE/OTS-NOTICE/2026-27/578 DATED 14.05.2026
ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT DEPUTY DIRECTOR 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
HC-KAR
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 the demand notice dated 14.05.2026 [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 `1,04,12,080/- as penalty. The said demand has been raised towards a one-time settlement [OTS] of the penalty for extracting 1,19,472 metric tonnes of building stone in excess of the quantity reported and for extracting a further quantity of 14,636 metric tonnes of building stone from the encroached area.
3. The petitioner states that he responded to the said notice by letter dated 07.08.2026. 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,
HC-KAR
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.
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.: 2