ASHOK MADHAV NAIK Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioners made separate applications for grant of permission for removal of Sand Bars and transportation of ordinary sand in Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ). The applications were made in the year 2015. The applications were placed before the District Sand Supervisory Committee in its meeting held on 30th October 2015. The applications were divided into categories 'A' to 'D'. According to the case of the petitioners, their applications fell in the category 'C'. The minutes of the meeting (Annexure F) recorded that, it was resolved not to reject the applications received under 'C' category and the same were ordered to be kept for reconsideration.

(3.) There are orders at Annexures 'G', 'H', 'J', 'K', 'L' and 'M' which are more or less identical, by which, in view of the decision taken in the District Sand Supervisory Committee on 30th October 2015, the applications were rejected on the ground that the petitioners did not produce the documents for showing that they have done mining previously by obtaining the sand mining contract or temporary permit.