Disposed

G.Hari Krishna v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Feb 2021WP/3060/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition challenging the non-issuance of transport permits for granite mining. The respondent was directed to consider the pending representation, request any missing particulars if needed, and decide within one month.

What did the court decide?

The respondents were directed to consider the petitioner's representation for transport permits, provide additional particulars if required, and pass appropriate orders within one month of receipt.

G.Hari Krishna Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.3060 of 2021

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking to declare the action of the 3^rd respondent in nonissuance of the transport permits and the necessary approvals on the online applications of the petitioner for transportation of mineral of colour granite quarried from time to time in an extent of 0.809 hectares in Sy.No.6/part Palempalli (V), Punganur Mandal, Chittoor District as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith approve the online applications and grant the transport permits to the petitioner for the colour granite excavated in the mining lease of the petitioner.

¶4

Heard both sides.

¶5

As per the averments in the affidavit, the petitioner was granted lease for quarry of colour granite in an extent of 0.809 hectares in Sy.No.6/part Palempalli (V), Punganur Mandal, Chittoor District vide proceedings No.798/TQL/CG/2003 dated 26.10.2015. Initially the said quarry lease was granted in favour of Mr. Prathap Chandran for the period from 18.9.2012 to 17.9.2032 and subsequently the same was transferred in the name of the petitioner for the unexpired portion of the lease period after according permission by the 2^nd respondent vide proceedings dated 28.8.2015. Pursuant to that, the petitioner has also obtained Environmental Clearance from the Ministry of Environment Forests & Climate Change (MoEF) and also the consent for Establishment (CFE) from the Pollution Control Board. After submitting all relevant approvals and clearances and after transfer of quarry lease and after taking necessary permission, the petitioner has invested huge amount i.e up to two crores of rupees

¶6

¶7

and started the quarry operations. Till 22.01.2020, the excavated granite was being dispatched under valid permits and transit forms issued by the 3^rd respondent regularly for export on payment of the royalty amount.

¶8

The petitioner further submits that he has got all legal and valid licenses and also obtained necessary permissions from the District Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (DEIAA), Ministry of Forests and Climate Change. While that being the situation, in the month of March, 2020, the petitioner applied for permits and e-transit form in the online mineral e-permit system, Government of Andhra Pradesh for 95.170 (MT) of colour granite excavated in the said leased area. But on verification, the same was rejected on the ground that enquiry is on by Vigilance and Enforcement Tirupati is going on Forest Issue. Subsequently on enquiries it came to know that no such enquiry is pending against the said lease and also came to know that all other lease holders are granted lease permits except the petitioner. Hence the petitioner made a representation on 22.01.2021 for issuance of dispatch permits but so far no reply from the respondents. Left with no option, the petitioner filed the present petition.

¶9

Learned Government Pleader for Mines & Geology appearing on behalf of the respondents, on written instructions, has submitted that the respondents have pointed out certain lapses of the petitioner and also stated in their written instructions that the petitioner has not submitted all the relevant material required for issuance of dispatch permits.

¶10

Learned Senior Counsel Sri Veera Reddy, appearing on behalf of the counsel for the petitioner submits that the said lapses were not brought to the notice of the petitioner and the authorities have not

¶11

¶12

passed any orders except the communication which was received by them on 06.4.2020.

¶13

Considering the above submissions, the respondents are directed to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 22.01.2021 for grant of dispatch permits for an extent of 0.809hectares in Sy.No.6/part Palempalli (V), Punganur Mandal, Chittoor District in accordance with the rules and if any additional particulars/material is required by the respondents, the same may be provided by the petitioner and on receipt of such required additional particulars/material, the authorities may consider and pass appropriate orders within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

¶14

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶15

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending

¶16

in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶17

________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH

¶18

Dated 15.02.2021 RD

¶19

¶20

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH

¶21

WRIT PETITION No.3060 of 2021

¶22

Dated 15.02.2021

¶23

G.Hari Krishna v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Hari Krishna v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kavati Chanikya, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Atta Thalupula Raju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M.D.Jagjeevan Ram Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kanna Nagaraju, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Rodda Anantha Rami Reddy Vs State of Ap

Shaik Muntaj Begum Vs State of Andhra Pradesh