Order 1. Petitioner claiming to be a trader carrying on business in the name and style of M/s Lucky Artificial Sand Industries, aggrieved by non implementation of the directions contained in the memorandum, dated 26.08.2013, Annexure-H of the Director, Department of Mines and Geology to fix the price and royalty in terms of schedule III to the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994, (‘the Rules’ for short) has presented this petition for a writ of mandamus and for appropriate directions to the 3rd respondent/Senior Geologist, Department of Mines and Geology, Haveri to hold an auction of pebble stones available on the banks of River Tungabhadra, at Kotihal, Ranebennur Taluk. 2. Petition is opposed by filing statement of objections of the respondent/State interalia pointing out that Rules when amended by notification dated 16.12.2013, Rules 8C to 8Y were inserted whereunder Rule 8N provides for separate stacking on non-saleable mineral and reads thus: “8N. Separat Stacking of non-saleable mineral (1) The non-saleable mineral rejects at quarry bottom shall regularly be collected and transported to the surface and the quarry or mine floor kept reasonably clear of debris. However in case of sand quarrying, mineral rejects like shingle, pebbles at riverbed shall regularly be collected and stored within the tendered area for utilization in reclamation measures and strengthening of river banks also. (2) Such non-saleable minor minerals suitable for possible use by small scale industries sector shall be properly recovered. (3) Small lumps of mineral shall, as far as possible, be segregated from the dumps and stored separately for future use. (4) The ground selected for dumping of top soil, overburden, waste material or non-saleable mineral shall be away from workings of quarry as specified in approved quarry plan. (5) Before starting quarrying operations, conceptual ultimate limits of the quarry shall be determined and dumping ground shall be so selected that dumping is not carried out within the limits of the ultimate size of the quarry except where simultaneous back filling is proposed.” 3. (5) Before starting quarrying operations, conceptual ultimate limits of the quarry shall be determined and dumping ground shall be so selected that dumping is not carried out within the limits of the ultimate size of the quarry except where simultaneous back filling is proposed.” 3. According to the respondent/State, the non saleable, mineral rejects, at the quarry bottom is required to be regularly collected and transported to the surface, while the quarry or mine floor is to be kept reasonably clear of debris and in case of sand quarrying, mineral rejects like shingle, pebbles at the riverbed shall be regularly collected and stored within the tendered area for utilization in reclamation measures and strengthening of river banks. It is the further case of respondent/State that in view of insertion of Rule 8N, the memorandum dated 26.08.2013, Annexure-H of the Director of Department of Mines and Geology, does not survive and therefore, no mandamus lies. 4. In addition, it is stated that pursuant to insertion of Rule 8N, no pebbles are subjected to auction since they come within the purview of non saleable mineral and separate stacking method is adopted for that mineral. It is said, pebbles are collected and stored for the purpose of strengthening the riverbed in the respective rivers, hence disposal of pebbles after extraction is unavailable. At paragraph 6, it is specifically pointed out that petitioner, without the permission of the competent authority, illegally stocked 1265 cubic metres of sand by violating Rule 4(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Rule 3(1) of the Rules, hence, the 3rd respondent/Senior Geologist imposed penalty of Rs.8,22,250/- by notice, dated 22.11.2012, AnnexureR1, to the statement of objections. 5. Petitioner filed a rejoinder statement that Rule 8N is totally opposed to Rule 8B and Rule 31A of the Rules and further that the amendment not retrospective in operation having come into force w.e.f. 16.12.2013, does not apply to the memorandum, dated 26.08.2013, Annexure-H of the Mines and Geology Department. 5. Petitioner filed a rejoinder statement that Rule 8N is totally opposed to Rule 8B and Rule 31A of the Rules and further that the amendment not retrospective in operation having come into force w.e.f. 16.12.2013, does not apply to the memorandum, dated 26.08.2013, Annexure-H of the Mines and Geology Department. In the additional rejoinder it is stated that the notice of the 3rd respondent imposing penalty of Rs.8,22,250/- when called in question in W.P.No.51511/2012, the petition was disposed of on the premise that an alternative and efficacious remedy under Rule 53 of the Rules was available, following which a revision petition, when filed, the revisional authority set-aside the notice and remitted the proceeding to the 3rd respondent with a direction to extend an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to pass orders in accordance with law, within four weeks from 16.05.2013. It is further stated that, on remand, the proceeding is pending before the revisional authority. In addition it is stated that in the light of sub Rule (2) to Rule 8N, since the intention of legislature is that a small scale industry can make use of pebbles, there is no prohibition to dispose of pebbles by way of public auction and therefore, the direction contained in Annexure-H, memorandum, is enforceable. 6. Although learned counsel for petitioner reiterates the averments setout in the memorandum of writ petition, nevertheless, regard being had to Rule 8N of the ‘Rules’ providing for separate stacking of non-saleable mineral rejects, like, shingle, pebbles at riverbed require to be collected and stored within the tendered area for utilization in reclamation measures and strengthening of river banks, obviously for protection and preservations of ecology, while sub Rule (2) of Rule 8N providing for proper recovery of non saleable minor mineral suitable for possible use by small scale industries sector does not permit an interpretation in the manner petitioner intends, i.e., permitting auction of the pebbles, on the basis of the memorandum, Annexure ‘H’. From Sub-Rule (1) what can be reasonably deciphered is that shingle, pebbles at riverbed are required to be collected and stored within the tendered area for utilization in reclamation measures and strengthening of river banks. Preservations of ecosystem, by taking measures to strengthen river banks, must receive precedence. 7. From Sub-Rule (1) what can be reasonably deciphered is that shingle, pebbles at riverbed are required to be collected and stored within the tendered area for utilization in reclamation measures and strengthening of river banks. Preservations of ecosystem, by taking measures to strengthen river banks, must receive precedence. 7. The next submission of the learned counsel that Rule 8B and Rule 31A when read in conjunction, permits auctioning of pebbles as directed in the memorandum Annexure ‘H’ is yet again a misconception. Rule 8B (1) and (2) of the Rules reads thus: “8B. Notifying the area for grant of lease by tender-cum-auction (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, the competent authority may by notification direct that quarrying leases 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 IVA. (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.” 8. The aforesaid provision invests in that the competent authority a jurisdiction to notify quarrying leases for quarrying specified or non-specified minor mineral in any ‘area’ belonging to the State Government and ‘available for grant’ as may be specified in the notification for which tenders are called while sub-Rule (2) also makes reference to non specified minor mineral in such area as may be notified under sub Rule (1). 9. Rule 31A provides for notification for grant of quarrying lease in respect of the area notified under Rule 8B. A conjoint reading of both the provisions, supra, is in the direction of establishing that based upon quantum of particular material available to be quarried in an area to be leased a grant of quarrying lease is by way of auction notification. Therefore, those two provisions do not come to the aid of the petitioner in support of his plea that shingle and pebbles collected in the riverbed is to be put to auction, on the direction contained in Annexure ‘H’, which admittedly is not a notification under Rule 8B(1) of the Rules. 10. Therefore, those two provisions do not come to the aid of the petitioner in support of his plea that shingle and pebbles collected in the riverbed is to be put to auction, on the direction contained in Annexure ‘H’, which admittedly is not a notification under Rule 8B(1) of the Rules. 10. There being no dispute that petitioner is issued with notice and a proceeding pending before the 3rd respondent over illegal stocking of sand, is in no way connected to the merit of this case, and therefore it is for the 3rd respondent to dispose of that proceeding in accordance with law. 11. The last of the submission of the learned counsel that amendment to Rule 8 by inserting of Rule 8N is by the notification dated 16.12.2013 while the memorandum, Annexure-H of the Director is dated 26.08.2013, prior in point of time to the notification, and therefore the memorandum, Annexure-H must be given effect to is also without merit. It must be noticed that once law is brought into force declaring that pebbles and shingle are required for strengthening the banks of the river and the area where they are stocked is not notified under Rule 8B(1) of the Rules, it is needless to state that the memorandum, Annexure-H is of no consequence. 12. In the result, petition devoid of merit is rejected.