Karnataka High Court
WP/21514/2026 of M/S GMM ENTERPRISES Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 20 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010479602026 NC: 2026:KHC:37009-DB WP No. 21514 of 2026 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. 21514 OF 2026 (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. 21514 OF 2026 (GM-MM-S)
BETWEEN:
1.
M/S GMM ENTERPRISES
A PARTNERSHIP FORMED VIDE A
PARTNERSHIP DEED
REG.OFF. #3368/1
SHAMANUR ROAD
LAKSHMI FLOUR MILL
LAKSHMI FLOUR MILLS PREMISES
DAVANAGERE - 577 004.
REP. BY ITS OWNER S.S. GANESH
…PETITIONER
(BY MS. DEEKSHA N AMRUTHESH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI AMRUTHESH N P, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPT. OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES
VIKASA SOUSHA
DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
Digitally
signed by
SRIDEVI S
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
2.
THE DIRECTOR
DEPT. OF MINES & GEOLOGY
KHANIJA BHAVAN
RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001
3.
THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST
DEPT. OF MINES & GEOLOGY
VIDYANAGAR
DAVANAGERE - 577 005
…RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT
OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING OF ANNEXURE-A, THE DEMAND
NOTICE DATED 15.05.2026 BEARING NO.GaBhuE-HiBhuDa:OTS- Notice-2026-27/280 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT SENIOR
GEOLOGIST OF DEPT. MINES AND GEOLOGY, DAVANAGERE, DEMANDING
RS.1,03,05,680/-
AS
FINE
BY
INVOKING
THE
PROVISIONS OF RULE 44-A OF THE KARNATAKA MINOR
MINERALS CONCESSION (AMENDMENT) RULES, 2026 AS ONE
TIME SETTLEMENT (OTS) WITH PENAL PROVISIONS IN CASE OF
NON-COMPLIANCE WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT
OF SAID NOTICE 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 Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.
HC-KAR
2. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the demand notice dated 15.05.2026 [impugned order] issued under Rule 44A of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994. The petitioner is aggrieved, inter alia, on the ground that the said demand notice has been issued without affording the petitioner any opportunity to be heard. It is contended that the impugned order is liable to be set aside as it has been issued in violation of principles of natural justice.
3. We note that in terms of the impugned order, the petitioner has been called upon to pay a penalty of `1,03,05,680/- on account of extracting excess quantity. Although the demand has been crystallized, the petitioner has also been directed to visit the concerned Office (Office of the Deputy Director, Department of Mines and Geology) "to consult and settle the matter".
4. The learned Additional Government Advocate fairly states that the impugned order may be construed as a show cause notice. The petitioner is at liberty to respond to the same within a period of 4 weeks from date. And, the concerned authorities would consider
HC-KAR
the petitioner's response, and an order would be passed after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being 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 SD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 18