S.T.PRASAD Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, a quarrying lease aspirant is knocking at the doors of Writ Court with the following two principal prayers:

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners highlighting the material facts as concisely put in the Synopsis seeks to falter the impugned order made by the 3rd respondent - Revisional Authority in dismissing his revision petition. The relevant part of the revisional order, a copy whereof avails at Annexure-X, reads as under

(3.) Learned Additional Government Advocate, on request appearing for the officials respondents opposes the petition making submission in justification of the impugned order. He contends that the Notification dtd. 8/4/2011, a copy whereof avails at Annexure-F issued in favour of the petitioner had specifically stipulated a period of one year for the commencement of quarrying operations and admittedly that having not happened no relief can be granted to him. He also highlights that the very statutory scheme itself is of 5 years and that being the statutory policy nothing can be done in the matter. So contending, he seeks dismissal of the writ petition.