Karnataka High Court
WP/37191/2025 of SRI R M MAHADEVAPPA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 20 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010808422025 NC: 2026:KHC:37188-DB WP No. 37191 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH 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. 37191 OF 2025 (GM-MM-S)
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH 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. 37191 OF 2025 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI R.M. MAHADEVAPPA
S/O LATE MADAPPA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
R/AT RANGUPURA VILLAGE
HOREYALA POST, BEGUR HOBLI
GUNDLUPET TALUK - 571 109
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI H.V. BHANU PRAKASH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BENGALURU - 560 001
2.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND CHAIRMAN
DISTRICT TASK FORCE
AUTHORITY FOR REGULATION AND LICENSING
OF CRUSHER UNITS
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRCIT - 571 313
Digitally
signed by K
P SWETHA
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
3.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR / SENIOR GEOLOGIST
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
CHAMRAJANAGAR DISTRICT - 571 313
…RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ANY APPROPRIATE DIRECTION DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3 TO ACT UPON THE REPRESENTATIONS
MADE BY THE PETITIONER AND TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION
OR ANY SUCH APPROPRIATE STRINGENT STEPS UNDER THE
REPRESENTATIONS VIDE ANNEXURE-C DATED 25/03/2024 & 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 petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under: "(i) Issue writ of mandamus or any appropriate direction directing the respondents No.1 to 3 to act upon the representations made by the petitioner and to take appropriate action or any such appropriate stringent steps under the representations vide Annexure-C dated 25.03.2024;
HC-KAR
(ii) Issue writ of direction or writ of mandamus, directing respondents No.1 to 3 to act upon the representations made by the petitioner and to take appropriate action to renewal the quarry license vide Annexure-A dated 06.01.2000;
(iii) Pass any other writ or direction which may be deemed fit to grant under the above facts and circumstances, in the interest of justice and equity."
2. It is the petitioner's case that his brother Linganna had applied for a quarry lease over an area measuring 1 acre in Survey No.128 of Arepura Village, Begur Hobli, Gundlupet Taluk, Chamarajanagara District. It is stated that the said quarry lease QL No.18 was granted on 06.01.2000 for a period of five years and the same expired on 05.01.2005. The petitioner claims that prior to the said period, the family members had entered into a partition deed dated 19.02.2003, whereby lands in Survey No.128 had fallen to his share.
3. The petition is bereft of any particulars as to what happened to the quarrying activities after the lease had expired.
4. The petitioner claims that after the partition was effected in the year 19.02.2003, he made several representations. However,
HC-KAR
the petitioner has not enclosed any copies of those representations. Concededly, the lease is not renewed. The petitioner after nearly two decades made a representation dated 25.03.2024 to the Deputy Director claiming that the lease had expired on 05.01.2005 and requesting that the lease be renewed. The petitioner has filed the present petition aggrieved on account of his representation not being considered.
5. The facts as disclosed in the present petition indicate that the quarry lease has long since expired and there are no provisions for renewal of the licence at this stage. The present petition is highly belated. We do not consider it apposite to entertain the same. In view of the above, no relief can be granted and the petition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE
KPS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26