1
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
         DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2013
                        PRESENT
       THE HON'BLE MR.D.H.WAGHELA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                          AND
        THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA
        WRIT PETITION No.10540/2013(GM-MMS)

BETWEEN :

M/S.JAYALAKSHMI STONE CRUSHER
SITUATED AT SY.NO.245/P1
DADIGATTA VILLAGE AND POST
JUTTANAHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATHI
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT 573 116
BY ITS PROPRIETOR BOMMEGOWDA.       ... PETITIONER

        (BY SRI B.ROOPESHA & SANDEEP M.K., ADV.)
AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA
       DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
       KANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD
       BANGALORE BY ITS DIRECTOR
       BANGALORE CITY 560 001.

2.     THE KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION
       CONTROL BOARD
       PARAISARA BHAVAN, 4TH AND 5GH FLOOR
       NO.49, CHURCH STREET
       BANGALORE BY ITS CHAIRMAN
       BANGALORE CITY 560 001.

3.     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       HASSAN DISTRICT
       HASSAN 573 209.

4.     THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
       CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY
       SUPPLY COMPANY
       MYSORE 573 228.
                               2
5.   THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
     CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY
     SUPPLY COMPANY
     CHANNARAYAPATNA DIVISION
     S.BELAGOLA TQ. CHANNARAYAPATNA
     HASSAN DISTRICT 573 201.

6.   THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
     CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY
     SUPPLY COMPANY, B.M.ROAD
     CHANNARAYAPATNA
     HASSAN DISTRICT 573 116.

7.   SENIOR GEOLOGIST & MEMBER SECRETARY
     DISTRICT STONE CRUSHER
     REGULATION COMMITTEE, HASSAN
     573 201.                    ...RESPONDENTS

           (BY SRI D.NAGARAJ, ADV. FOR R2, SRI R.G.
           KOLLE, AGA FOR R1 AND 3)

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 28.8.2012 PASSED BY THE R2
VIDE ANNEXURE-C, DIRECT THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE
APPLICATION     FILED  BY    THE    PETITIONER   FOR
GRANT/RENEWAL OF LICENSE FOR STONE CRUSHERS DATED
11.2.2013 VIDE ANNEXURE-B.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                           ORDER

D.H.WAGHELA, C.J. (Oral) :

The petitioner herein has invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution with the prayer to quash order dated 28.8.2012 of the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board whereby the petitioner is directed, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 read with Rule 20-A of the Karnataka 3 Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1983 to close down the operation of their stone crusher forthwith and directed the Deputy Commissioner, Hassan District to cease the said stone crusher immediately, if the crushing unit has not stopped the operation after the impugned order and also directed the Managing Director of the Chamundeshwari Electricity Supply Company, Mysore to stop the power supply to the unit of the petitioner.

2. In view of the background elaborately articulated in the impugned order dated 28.08.2012 and in view of the observations made by the Apex Court in Bhopal Gas Peeditha Mahila Udyog Sangathan and Others vs. Union of India and others ((2012) 8 SCC 326), more particularly in paragraphs 40 and 41 thereof, the first prayer to quash the impugned order as aforesaid is not pressed by the petitioner with liberty to take alternative remedies available to the petitioner as may be necessary and advised.

3. Learned counsel Mr.Roopesh appearing for the petitioner fairly conceded that the petition would not survive for pressing the second prayer for a writ of mandamus directing the State of Karnataka in its Department of Mines and Geology to consider the application filed by the petitioner for grant/renewal of licence for stone crushers under the 4 provisions of the Karnataka Regulation of Stone Crushers Act, 2011 in so far as the application dated 11.02.2013 made therefor is required to be processed and disposed within three months by the provisions of Section 3 of the said Act. Besides that, the learned Additional Government Advocate Mr.Kolle appearing for respondent no.1 fairly stated, on instructions, that the Licensing Authority under the aforesaid Act shall dispose of application of the petitioner within the prescribed period. Therefore, the petition does not survive for any further orders and it is disposed accordingly with no order as to costs.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-

JUDGE Sk/-