Karnataka High Court Passes Order in Patta Land Writ Petition Challenging the Constitutionality of Mineral Rules

Must Read

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

TRP Scam Case: Bombay HC Extends Protection To Arnab Goswami and Other Employees Till the Next Hearing

On Friday, the Bombay High court extended the protection that was given, to Republic TV’s Editor in Chief Arnab Goswami and other employees of ARG Outlier Media Private Limited till January 29th in the alleged case of Television Rating Point manipulation. A status report was submitted by the police to the division bench of Justices S.S.Shinde and Manish Pitale by the Police on the ongoing case.

Plea Seeks FIR Against Maharashtra Minister Dhananjay Munde in Bombay HC for False Info

A plea has been filed in Bombay High Court seeking an FIR against Maharashtra minister Dhananjay Munde who is undergoing times of trouble due to his extra-marital affair. Recently, an FIR had been lodged against Munde by a woman, accusing him of raping her sister. Munde clarified that he was actually in a relationship with that woman and had two children. He accused the two women of blackmailing him.

Writ Petition for Compensation Accepted by Calcutta High Court 

Introduction The Petitioner Purna Ch. Biswas filed a Writ Petition with the complaint that their claims for a higher quantum...

No Members Could Be Disqualified Without Authorisation by Political Party: Gujarat High Court

Excerpt The dispute application no.7 of 2020 filed by respondent no.2 before designated authority. Thereafter the designated authority order dated...

Delhi High Court Directs Delhi Jal Board To Make Supply of Potable Drinking Water

The High Court of Delhi in the matter of Delhi Sainik Cooperation Housing Ltd. v. Union of India &...

Follow us

A Writ Petition was filed in the Karnataka High Court under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Indian Constitution. The petition challenged the constitutional validity of the provisions of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2016.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner is the owner of Patta land in the old Mysuru area. His property comprises granite deposit. He claims to have an absolute right over the sub-soil mineral granite found on his land. He also claims to have a right to excavate and transport subject to getting a transport permit. But, he claims that the amendments by the Karnataka Government have taken away the rights of the Patta landholders in Ex- Mysuru area. Specifically, to carry on quarrying operations seeking no permission from the government.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner submitted the request to mandate the pattadars to get working permission or license for quarrying operation of the subsoil mineral vesting in the amounts so as to keep in mind the usurping of rights of the owner of the minerals.

He drew the Court’s attention towards the State of Karnataka v. Dundamada Shetty. In this case, the Court held that the Patta landowner of Ex- Mysuru area may quarry granite in their subsoil. That too, without any restriction from the State Government.

He contended, the Amendment Rules of 2016, seeks to enhance the royalty more than once within three years. But, subsection (3) of section (15) of Mines and Minerals (Development and
Regulation) Act, 1957 restricts royalty enhancement over one time.

Respondent’s Arguments

The Counsel for the respondent submitted that the Government brought the amendment for efficient implementation of mining and environmental laws.

He also submits that the decision in State of Karnataka v. Dundamada Shetty case is no more a good law. As held in the State of Meghalaya v. All Dimasa Student Union, DIMA HASAO, the government has the power to frame any law for regulating excavation of the minerals vesting with any person other than the State Government.

Court’s Observations

The Court kept the rights of pattadars in Ex- Mysuru area of Karnataka in consideration. They are also the owners of the minerals in the subsoil.

The Court observed that full-bench decision in the Dundamada Shetty case on Subsection (1) of Section (4) of the Minors and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 is no longer a good law.

Subsection (1) of Section (4) will apply to cases where the owner of the land who is the owner of the mineral himself wants to win the minerals. It holds the same in the light of the recent decision of the Apex Court in the State of Meghalaya.

The Court considered the validity of a provision of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 32 of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rule, 1994. The rule seeks to get a license to carry out quarrying activities. The Court observes that the rule applies to the owners of Patta land who are the owner of subsoil mineral granite. The rule is not unconstitutional and does not take away the rights of ownership of pattadars. It will only ensure that they carry quarrying activities carefully, on the liability to pay royalty.

The Court observed that the enhancement of royalty made in the year 2014 and 2016 are in separate block period. Thus, there is no merit in the contention about the enhancement of royalty.

In light of the petitioners challenge to Sub-rule 5 of Rule 42, the Court observed that it imposes the time limit in the view to avoid exploitation of permits given to transport. Hence, there is no illegality accompanied with it. Moreover, there is an arrangement for providing extension or renewal of such permit by the competent Authority.

Court’s Decision

The Court held that the pattadars of Ex- Mysuru area who have ownership rights in granite or any other mineral in subsoil covered by the first proviso to Section 38 of the Mysuru Land Revenue Code, 1888 will continue to have ownership rights over such minerals.

Moreover, the Court held the Sub-rule (1) of Rule 32 of the Karnataka Mineral Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994, as amended with effect from 12th August 2016 is valid.

Rule 3-C, Sub-rule (4) of Rule 6 and Sub-rule (1) of Rule 47 of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rule, 1994 were struck down only to a limited extent.

Sub-rule (10) and fourth proviso to Rule 36 shall not apply to cases where the owner of the land, who is the owner of the mineral himself wants the win the minerals in Ex- Mysuru area. Whereas, they declare all other provisions which are subject matters of challenge in the writ petition as constitutional.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News,InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

TRP Scam Case: Bombay HC Extends Protection To Arnab Goswami and Other Employees Till the Next Hearing

On Friday, the Bombay High court extended the protection that was given, to Republic TV’s Editor in Chief Arnab Goswami and other employees of ARG Outlier Media Private Limited till January 29th in the alleged case of Television Rating Point manipulation. A status report was submitted by the police to the division bench of Justices S.S.Shinde and Manish Pitale by the Police on the ongoing case.

Plea Seeks FIR Against Maharashtra Minister Dhananjay Munde in Bombay HC for False Info

A plea has been filed in Bombay High Court seeking an FIR against Maharashtra minister Dhananjay Munde who is undergoing times of trouble due to his extra-marital affair. Recently, an FIR had been lodged against Munde by a woman, accusing him of raping her sister. Munde clarified that he was actually in a relationship with that woman and had two children. He accused the two women of blackmailing him.

Writ Petition for Compensation Accepted by Calcutta High Court 

Introduction The Petitioner Purna Ch. Biswas filed a Writ Petition with the complaint that their claims for a higher quantum of compensation have not yet...

No Members Could Be Disqualified Without Authorisation by Political Party: Gujarat High Court

Excerpt The dispute application no.7 of 2020 filed by respondent no.2 before designated authority. Thereafter the designated authority order dated 28.10.2020 disqualified the petitioner and...

Delhi High Court Directs Delhi Jal Board To Make Supply of Potable Drinking Water

The High Court of Delhi in the matter of Delhi Sainik Cooperation Housing Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors held that right to...

Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Security To BJP Leader Alleged for Not Supporting Farmers Protest

The Order had come in the form of a Writ Petition filed by Tikshan Sood under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition before...

Lahore High Court Outlaws Two-Finger Virginity Test

The Lahore High Court in Pakistan has outlawed the use and conduct of virginity tests, namely, the use of the “two-finger” virginity test and...

London Court Rejects Assange’s Extradition – What Happens Now? 

Earlier last week, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser, sitting in the Westminster Magistrates’ Court denied the Government of the U.S.A.'s request to the U.K. to...

Calcutta High Court Decides in Favor of Contractor as He Accidentally Pays an Excessively High Amount

Introduction The present writ petition has been filed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to revoke the Petitioner’s offer as...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -