CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(2022) 04 KAR CK 0002

J N Stone Products vs State Of Karnataka

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 1 April 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ritu Raj Awasthi, CJ · S.R. Krishna Kumar, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 7036 Of 2022 (GM-MM-S)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 394 words

Ritu Raj Awasthi, CJ

1.

Heard. The notice for the respondents shall be accepted by the learned Additional Government Advocate.

The copy of the writ petition shall be served on the learned Additional Government Advocate during the course of the day.

2.

The writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:

“I. Issue writ of certiorari quashing the impugned notice No Bhu E/Hibu (Kolar)/ 2021-22/2658 dated 09-03-2022, which is produced at Annexure-C to the writ petition.

II. Issue writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent protect the interest of the petitioner as per lease agreement dated 10-12-2020, which is produced at Annexure-A to the writ petition.

III. Please to issue any writ or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems fit under these circumstances in the interest of justice and equity.”

3.

As per the own case of the petitioner, the petitioner has been granted the quarrying lease on 10.12.2020, the copy of which is annexed as Annexure-A to the writ petition. Now, suddenly, the impugned notice dated 09.03.2022 has been issued whereby, the petitioner has been called to stop the mining and crushing activities in the crusher and stone mining lease area with immediate effect and until further orders and has also been directed to submit written explanation.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the written explanation to the impugned show cause notice has been submitted to respondent No.2 on 14.03.2022, however, no decision has been taken by respondent No.2 till date.

5.

From the averments made in the writ petition, it appears that there is some dispute with respect to the land which has been granted to the petitioner on lease. One Smt.Nikitha S. Vasan has made a complaint to respondent No.2 pursuant to which, the impugned show cause notice has been issued.

6.

We have considered the submissions and gone through the record.

7.

We are of the considered view that once notice has been issued to the petitioner, it shall be brought to the logical end.

8.

In view of the above, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the impugned show cause notice and take appropriate decision in accordance with law within a period of seven days from the date a copy of this order is produced before him, if not already taken.