NARESH NAYAK Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the request of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal at this stage itself.

(2.) The petitioner, said to be the leaseholder of QL No.854 in respect of the land situated at Yemmatti village in Kalaghatgi Taluka, Dharwar District, has preferred this writ petition on being aggrieved of the notice dated 14.03.2016 (Annexure-A), as issued by the respondent No.3, wherein a demand is made for a sum of Rs.23,14,987/- being the arrears of royalty on the allegation of the petitioner not having obtained the mineral dispatch permits.

(3.) Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents though had attempted to justify the action of the respondents, but could not dispute the fundamental fact that before calling upon the petitioner to remit the amount by way of the impugned notice dated 14.03.2016, the petitioner was not served with a prior notice of the demand sought to be made.