Karnataka High Court
WP/20833/2026 of SRI D SUDHAKARA SHETTY Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 21 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010468492026 NC: 2026:KHC:37313-DB WP No. 20833 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.20833 OF 2026 (GM-MM_S) BETWEEN:
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT PETITION NO.20833 OF 2026 (GM-MM_S)
BETWEEN:
SRI. D. SUDHAKARA SHETTY
S/O. DASU SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
MANAGING PARTNER AND
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF
M/S. MUGRODI CONSTRUCTIONS
OFFICE AT MUGRODY ENCLAVE,
KAVOOR, GANDHI NAGAR,
KAVOOR, MANGALURU,
KARNATAKA - 575015.
…PETITIONER
(BY SMT. NIRIKSHA Y.M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
AND INDUSTRIES
VIKASA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560001.
2.
THE DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
KHANIJA BHAVANA
Digitally signed by
MAHALAKSHMI B M
Location: High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560001.
3.
THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
PRAJASOUDHA, PADIL
MANGALURU - 575008.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. HARISH K.S., 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 APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR
DIRECTION QUASHING THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 17.04.2026
BEARING
NO.Gabhooi/Hibhoovi(M)/Kagagu/OTS/2026-27/363
RELATING TO MINING LEASE NO.401 DEMANDING RS.2,45,72,100/- AND THE DEMAND NOTIE DATED 17.04.2026 BEARING NO.
Gabhur/Hibhuvi(M)/KS/OTS/2026-27/360
RELATING
TO
MINING
LEASE NO.3252 DEMANDING RS.2,15,79,950/-, BOTH ISSUED BY
RESPONDENT NO.3 UNDER RULE 44A OF THE KARNATAKA MINOR
MINERAL CONCESSION RULES, 1994 AS AMENDED IN 2026 UNDER
THE ONE TIME SETTLEMENT SCHEME, TOGETHER WITH ALL
PENAL AND COERCIVE CONSEQUENCES CONTAINED THEREIN
VIDE ANNEXURE-A 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 Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the demand notices dated 17.04.2026 [impugned orders] issued under Rule 44A of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994, demanding an amount of `2,45,72,100/- and `2,15,79,950/-. The said demands are 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. One of the principal grounds on which the impugned notices are challenged is that they were issued without affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.
4. The learned Additional Government Advocate clearly states that the impugned demand notices may 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
HC-KAR
pass a final 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 demands 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.: 20