A.N.MURTHY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.

(2.) The very limited issue is involved in the present petition. The petitioner is the lessee of the quarry in survey No.272 to an extent of 1 acre 8 guntas situated at Sadahalli Village, Devanahalli Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District issued by the Competent Authority i.e., the Director, Department of Mining and Geology on 31/12/2014 for a period of 20 years. It may not be necessary to refer to other factual aspects, suffice to say that respondent No.4-Deputy Director, Department of Mining and Geology issued various demand notices to the petitioner for payment of outstanding penalty amount and the copy of such one demand notice dtd. 23/1/2020 is placed on record at page 120. The notices refer to the various outstanding amount and certain defects were observed in the inspection of the audit report. These demand notices conclude with the statement as follows:

(3.) Being aggrieved by the demand notices, the petitioner submitted Revision Petition under Rule 53(2) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concessions Rules, 1994 (for short 'the Rules, 1994') before the State Government i.e., the Secretary, Department of Industries and Commerce, Bangalore. By the communication dtd. 28/7/2022, the Under Secretary to the Government informed the petitioner that as per the provisions of Rule 53 (2) of the Rules, 1994, Revision is maintainable before the Government, only for the orders passed by the Authorities above the rank to that of Additional Director, Mines and Geology Department. The petitioner was further informed that the Revision Petition filed before the Government is not maintainable as per Rule 53 (2) of the Rules, 1994.