ORDER 1.Leave granted. 2. The appellant had applied for grant of a quarrying lease to the State respondents in 1991 under the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1969 (for short "the 1969 Rules"). On the allegation that the application had not been disposed of by the respondents, the appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court. While the writ petition was pending, the 1969 Rules were repealed by the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1994 Rules"). The appellant again applied under the 1994 Rules to the State respondents for grant of quarrying rights. The first writ petition was accordingly disposed of with a direction to the authorities to consider the appellants application in accordance with the 1994 Rules. It is the appellants case that its application was considered by the State respondents and its case was recommended for grant of quarrying rights. However, no grant was, in fact, made. 3. At this stage, on 6-5-1995, the 1994 Rules were amended, inter alia, by the introduction of Rules 8-A and 8-B. These Rules are quoted subsequently in this judgment after completing the narration of facts. On 11-12-1996 a notification was issued by the respondents under Section 8-B that quarrying leases to quarry specified minor minerals were available for grant in respect of certain specified areas by way of tender-cum-auction. The specified areas included the area applied for by the appellant. This notification was impugned by the appellant by a second writ petition. The appellants submissions in the writ petition briefly were twofold: (1) that its case had already been recommended prior to the introduction of Rules 8-A and 8-B; and (2) that Rule 8-B notification could have been issued only in respect of lands if a notification had been issued under Rule 8-A. 4. The learned Single Judge accepted the second submission of the appellant and held that unless there was a notification issued under Rule 8-A, there was no question of the respondents invoking provisions of Rule 8-B. Inasmuch as there was, admittedly, no notification under Rule 8-A, the tender-cum-auction notification in respect of the particular land for which the appellant had applied was set aside. The respondents were directed to consider the appellants application relating to the land in question within a specified time-frame. 5. The respondents were directed to consider the appellants application relating to the land in question within a specified time-frame. 5. The appeal preferred by the respondent before the Division Bench was allowed by the order impugned before us. The Division Bench held that Rule 8-B was wholly independent of Rule 8-A and there was no need to issue any notification at all under Rule 8-A prior to issuance of the notification under Rule 8-B. 6. The appellants petition for special leave was entertained by this Court on a limited ground, namely, on the question of interpretation of Rules 8-A and 8-B of the 1994 Rules. 7. Rules 8-A and 8-B read as follows: "8-A. Availability of land belonging to the State Government to be notified for grant.- (1) No area belonging to the State Government- (a) which was previously held or is being held under a quarrying lease; (b) the quarrying lease granted in respect of which has lapsed under Rule 6; (c) in respect of which a notification has been issued under sub-rule (3) of Rule 8; shall be available for grant unless the availability of the area for grant is notified in the Official Gazette and specifying the date (being the date not earlier than thirty days from the date of publication of such notification in the Official Gazette) from which such area shall be available for grant. (2) The State Government may, for reasons to be recorded in writing relax the provisions of sub-rule (1) in any special case. (2) The State Government may, for reasons to be recorded in writing relax the provisions of sub-rule (1) in any special case. (3) Any application for grant of quarrying lease in respect of area whose availability for grant is required to be notified under sub-rule (1) shall, if- (a) no notification has been issued under that rule; or (b) whether any such notification has been issued, the period specified in the notification has not expired, be deemed to be premature and shall not be entertained, and the application fee thereon, if any paid, shall be returned." (emphasis added) Rule 8-B(1) of the Rules reads as follows: "8-B. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in these Rules, the competent authority may by notification direct that quarrying lease to quarry specified or non-specified minor mineral in any area belonging to the State Government and available for grant, as may be specified in such notification; shall be granted by tender-cum-auction in accordance with the provisions of Chapter IV-A. (2) Where any area is notified under sub-rule (1), no quarrying lease to quarry specified or as the case may be, non-specified minor mineral in such area shall be granted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter III or Chapter IV, as the case may be." (emphasis added) 8. Rule 8-A, as its short title indicates, relates to the "availability of land". Sub-rule (1) relates to different kinds of lands belonging to the State Government specified in clauses (a), (b) and (c). These three specific kinds of land will, according to the rule, not be "available for grant" unless the availability of the area for grant is notified in the Official Gazette in the manner specified. Therefore, the precondition for availability of these particular kinds of lands mentioned in clauses (a),(b) and (c) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 8-A is the issuance of the notification in the Official Gazette. 9. Rule 8-B, on the other hand, proceeds on the basis that lands are "available for grant". In respect of such "available lands" an option has been given to the competent authority to direct that such "available land" shall be granted by tender-cum-auction. 9. Rule 8-B, on the other hand, proceeds on the basis that lands are "available for grant". In respect of such "available lands" an option has been given to the competent authority to direct that such "available land" shall be granted by tender-cum-auction. The ordinary process of obtaining a grant which has been provided under Rule 9 is, therefore, not available once the lands have been so notified under Rule 8- B. This is clear from the language of Rule 9(1) which says that every application for grant of a lease to quarry specified minor minerals in the land belonging to the State Government "which has not been notified under Rule 8-B" shall be made in the form specified and under the procedure prescribed in that rule. 10. The learned Single Judge was, therefore, correct insofar as he held that unless there were a notification under Rule 8-A there could be no notification under Rule 8- B but he erred in failing to note that this was only applicable in respect of the three particular categories mentioned in Rule 8-A. The Division Bench was also right insofar as it is held that Rule 8-A notification did not invariably have to precede a notification under Rule 8-B in respect of all categories of land. The true position appears to be that lands for the purpose of grant of quarrying rights must be available with the State Government. As far as the lands specified in Rules 8-A (1) (a), (b) and (c) are concerned, they will be made available for grant of quarrying rights only after the notification is issued. The competent authority can entertain applications for grant of quarrying rights under Rule 9 in respect of all available lands unless the competent authority has notified that particular "available lands" will be subject to tender-cum-auction basis under Rule 8-B. 11. It is not the appellants case that the lands for which the appellant had applied, fell within the particular categories mentioned in Rules 8-A (1) (a), (b) and (c). In that view of the matter it would not be necessary for any notification to have been issued prior to the issuance of the notification under Rule 8-B. In the circumstances, we hold that the notification under Rule 8-B is valid and dismiss the appeals, albeit for reasons other than those expressed by the Division Bench. 12. No costs.