VIVEK EXPORTS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 7th September 2020, notice was issued to the respondents. The order records that the parties are put to notice that an endeavour shall be made to decide the petition finally. Accordingly, yesterday this petition was taken up for final disposal. With a view to appreciate the controversy involved in the petition, briefly it is necessary to refer to few factual aspects.

(2.) The challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to order dated 10th June 2020 passed by the State Government by which the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of deemed extension of quarrying lease in accordance with sub- rule (3) of Rule 8-A of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short, the "said Rules of 1994") has been rejected. The land-subject matter of this petition is in Survey No.49/1 measuring 16 acres at Sebinakatte village, Kushtagi Taluk, Koppal District (for short "the said land"). A quarrying lease was executed in favour of the petitioner on 15th October 2009 in respect of Pink Granite. The lease expired on 14th October 2019. An application was made by the petitioner on 12th March 2018 for grant of a deemed extension of the lease as provided under Rule 8-A of the said Rules of 1994.

(3.) In the impugned order, two main issues were formulated. The first issue was, whether the said land is a forest land and a forest clearance was necessary. The second issue was whether the petitioner is entitled to deemed extension as provided under sub-rule (3) of Rule 8A of the said Rules of 1994. The first issue was answered by holding that the subject land was a forest land and it requires forest clearance for undertaking any non-forest activity. The second issue was answered by holding that prior approval of the Central Government under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 was required for grant of deemed extension of lease. Therefore, the prayer made by the petitioner was rejected.