Karnataka High Court
WP/7791/2024 of SHRI. D. S. ESHWARAPPA Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 24 July 2025
NC: 2025:KHC:28411-DB WP No. 7791 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI WRIT PETITION NO. 7791 OF 2024 (GM-MM_S) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. D. S. ESHWARAPPA
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
WRIT PETITION NO. 7791 OF 2024 (GM-MM_S)
BETWEEN:
1.
SHRI. D. S. ESHWARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
R/AT NO.925, 12TH CROSS
BEHIND SIT
GANGOTHRI NAGARA LAYOUT
TUMKUR - 572 103
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVINDRA GAJANAN KOLLE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU
BENGALURU - 560 001
2.
THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
AND INDUSTRIES
VIKASA SOUDH, BENGALURU
BENGALURU - 560 001
3.
THE DIRECTOR AND COMMISSIONER
DEPT. OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
Digitally
signed by
AMBIKA H B
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
KHANIJA BHAVAN
NO.49, RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001
4.
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND
COMPETENT AUTHORITY
KHANIJA BHAVANA
SPOORTHI LAYOUT
BADDIHALLI, RING ROAD
TUMKUR - 572 104
5.
THE JOINT DIRECTOR AND
REVISING AUTHORITY
KHANIJA BHAVAN
1ST D CROSS ROAD, I BLOCK
RAMAKRISHNA NAGARA
MYSURU - 570 022
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED PRAYING UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 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 ENDORSEMENT DATED 27/12/2023 PASSED BY
THE 4TH RESPONDENT DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND COMPETENT
AUTHORITY, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS
PETITION,
COMING
ON
FOR
PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
HC-KAR
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
2
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: "A. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other Order or Direction, directing to quash or set aside the Endorsement at No.GaBhuE/UNiT/KaGaGu-559 2023-24/ 5380 dated 27.42.2023 passed by the 4th Respondent Deputy Director & Competent Authority, produced at ANNEXURE-A; and/or
B. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other order or Direction directing the 4th Respondent Deputy Director & Competent Authority to pass an Order of — ‘Deemed Extension’ valid for a period of 30 years in terms of newly substituted Rule 8-A (2) of KMMC Amendment Rules, 2023, effective from 17,03.2023, in respect of Petitioner’s Quarry Lease at QL No.559 dated 25.03.2006 over an area of 2.00 Acres in Sy.No.9 of Panditanahalli Village, Tumkur Taluka, Tumkur District produced at ANNEXURE-C; and/or
C. Pass any such other Orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit & proper under the facts & circumstances of the case, to meet the ends of justice."
2. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an endorsement dated 27.12.2023 [Endorsement No.GaBhuE/UNiTa/ KaGaGu-559/2023-24/5380] passed by respondent No.4 [the
HC-KAR
Deputy Director and Competent Authority], whereby the petitioner’s application for renewal of lease in respect of Quarry Lease No.559 granted for extracting ordinary building stone, was rejected.
3. The petitioner was granted the quarry lease [Quarry Lease No.559] over an area of 2 Acres in Survey No.9 of Panditanahalli Village, Tumakuru Taluka and District on 25.03.2006. The term of the lease was five years. The said lease expired on 24.03.2011. On 09.05.2013, the petitioner filed an application for renewal of the said lease. However, the said application was rejected by the respondent No.4 on 22/23.07.2014 for the reason that the petitioner had not applied for renewal within the stipulated period of ninety days from the expiry of the lease.
4. The petitioner preferred revision petition before respondent No.5, which was dismissed on 12.01.2017. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present petition.
5. The controversy involved in the present petition is covered against the petitioner by a decision rendered today by this Court in Writ Petition No.7261/2024 captioned G.K. Basavaraju v. State of
HC-KAR
Karnataka and others: Neutral Citation No.:2025:KHC:28411- DB.
6. For the reasons stated therein, the present petition is dismissed.
Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE
AHB