PARIMALA GRANITES (P) LTD. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The appellant had applied for grant of a quarrying lease to the State respondents in 1991 under the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1969 (for short "the 1969 Rules"). On the allegation that the application had not been disposed of by the respondents, the appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court. While the writ petition was pending, the 1969 Rules were repealed by the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1994 Rules"). The appellant again applied under the 1994 Rules to the State respondents for grant of quarrying rights. The first writ petition was accordingly disposed of with a direction to the authorities to consider the appellant's application in accordance with the 1994 Rules. It is the appellant's case that its application was considered by the State respondents and its case was recommended for grant of quarrying rights. However, no grant was, in fact, made.

(3.) At this stage, on 6-5-1995, the 1994 Rules were amended, inter alia, by the introduction of Rules 8-A and 8-B. These Rules are quoted subsequently in this Judgement after completing the narration of facts. On 11-12-1996 a notification was issued by the respondents under Section 8-B that quarrying leases to quarry specified minor minerals were available for grant in respect of certain specified areas by way of tender-cum-auction. The specified areas included the area applied for by the appellant. This notification was impugned by the appellant by a second writ petition. The appellant's submissions in the writ petition briefly were twofold: (1) that its case had already been recommended prior to the introduction of Rules 8-A and 8-B; and (2) that Rule 8-B notification could have been issued only in respect of lands if a notification had been issued under Rule 8-A.