Dismissed¶80

Sabbavarapu Maheshwara Rao v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Jul 2025WP/10422/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quarry lease road metal and building stone; Sy.No.82 P Neliparthi Village Salur Mandal Manyam District; G.O.Ms.No.107 dated 30-07-2016; G.O.Ms.163 supersession; no objection certificate adjacent landowners; Government land hillock; Tahsildar report 03.06.2024; lease transfer 08.01.2024 to 07.01.2034; SEIAA environmental clearance CTE CTO; Joint Collector proceedings 154/Q/2020 dt. 11.03.2024; writ of mandamus Articles 14 21 300-A; dismissed without costs; Justice Kiranmayee Mandava; High Court of Andhra Pradesh; W.P. No. 10422 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

G.O.Ms.No.107, dated 30-07-2016 does not provide for obtaining of no objection from the owners of adjacent lands. ¶74

Sabbavarapu Maheshwara Rao Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶80

Issue for consideration

Whether the grant of the quarry lease in respect of the subject lands without obtaining no objection from the petitioners, whose lands abut the quarry lease area, is illegal and arbitrary. +1 more

¶67

Court's answer

Since the subject land is stated to be Government land and none of the contingencies contemplated in G.O.Ms.No.107 (NOC for revenue lands adjoining or within 500 metres of the R.F. boundary via the Divisional Forest Officer; consent of assignees/pattadars of assigned/patta lands) were pointed out, the Court was not inclined to interfere or grant the relief sought.

¶79

Ratio / Principle

G.O.Ms.No.107, dated 30-07-2016 does not provide for obtaining of no objection from the owners of adjacent lands.

¶74

Key takeaways

Observation while dismissing: the unofficial respondent No.8 shall take all safety measures as provided under law, adhere to the licence conditions, and take all safety and environmental measures while conducting quarry operations.obiter¶79

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Kiranmayee Mandava, J.), W.P. No. 10422 of 2025, decided 03.07.2025: Writ petition under Article 226 by four adjacent landowners challenging proceedings no. 154/Q/2020 dt. 11.03.2024 of the Joint Collector, Manyam District, granting a road metal and building stone quarry lease over 4.429 Hectares (Ac. 10.94 cents) in Sy.No.82 P of Neliparthi Village, Salur Mandal, Manyam District — initially granted to respondent No.7 and transferred to respondent No.8 (Navadurga Mining Infra) for ten years from 08.01.2024 to 07.01.2034. Held: G.O.Ms.No.107 dated 30-07-2016 does not provide for obtaining no objection from owners of adjacent lands; its NOC requirements concern revenue lands adjoining or within 500 metres of the R.F. boundary (NOC via the Divisional Forest Officer) and consent of assignees/pattadars of assigned/patta lands. Since the subject land was stated to be Government land and none of these contingencies were pointed out, the Court declined to interfere. Writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs, observing that respondent No.8 shall take all safety and environmental measures and adhere to licence conditions; pending miscellaneous applications closed as sequel.

¶1

APHC010199072025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 10422 OF 2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sabbavarapu Maheshwara Rao, S/o Late Muthyala Naidu, Aged about 67 years, Occ Farmer R/o 51-10-583 Bangaramma Colony Salur Parvathipuram Manyam District - 535 591

¶10

Sabbavarapu Kishore, S/o Sabbavarapu Maheshwara Rao Aged about 41 years, Occ Farmer, R/o 51-10-583, Bangaramma Colony, Salur, Parvathipuram Manyam District - 535 591

¶11

Venkata Papa Ratnam, W/o. Sabbavarapu Maheshwara Rao, Aged about 57 years, Occ Housewife, R/o. 51-10-583, Bangaramma Colony, Salur, Parvathipuram Manyam District-535 591

¶12

Sabbavarapu Sridhar, S/o. Sabbavarapu Maheswara Rao, Aged about 35 years, Occ Software Engineer R/o. 51-10-583, Bangaramma Colony, Salur, Parvathipuram Manyam District - 535 591

¶13

...Petitioners

¶14

AND

¶15

The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep by its Principal Secretary,

¶16

Department of Mines and Geology Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Andhra Pradesh.

¶17

The Director of Mines and Geology, State of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati Andhra Pradesh.

¶18

The District collector, Manyam District.

¶19

The Joint Collector, Manyam District.

¶20

The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Manyam^District. 6. The Tahsildar, Salur Mandal, Manyam District.,

¶21

Thalamanchali Dhanunjaya Reddy, S/o. Late. T. Ventada Subba Reddy, R/o. D.No 3/430, P. Kottapalli Village, Penagalur Mandal Annamayya District.

¶22

Navadurga Mining Infra, Rep. By its Managing Partner N. Srinivasa Rao S/o. Satyanarayana (Late) Door No. 42-1-146, Vedasamajam Street Salur Village and Mandal, Parvatipuram Manyam^District-535 591

¶23

...Respondents

¶24

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities more particularly the respondent No.4 in issuing the impugned proceedings vide proceedings no. 154/Q/2020 dt. 11.03.2024 granting lease for road metal and building stone quarry for 4.429 Hectares (Ac. 10.94 cents) covered by Sy.No.82 P of Neliparthi Village, Salur Mandal, Manyam District to respondent No.7as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and violative of G.O.Ms.No. 107 issued by Industries and Commerce - Mines II Department dt.30.07.2016, and consequently^directthe respondent authorities to cancel the existing license issued and follow due procedure as envisaged under G.O.Ms.No. 107 issued by Industries and Commerce - Mines II Department dt.30.07.2016 for grant of fresh license if any in hillock in covered by Sy.No.82 P of Neliparthi Village Salur Mandal, Manyam District.

¶25

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶26

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the operation of the impugned proceedings vide proceedings no. 154/Q/2020 dt. 11.03.2024 granting road metal and building stone quarry lease to an extent of 4.429 Hectares (Ac. 10.94 cents)covered by Sy.No.82 P of Neliparthi Village, Salur Mandal, Manyam District pending adjudication of Writ Petition.

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioners: M/S. DIVYA.V

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3, 4 & 6: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No. 8: SRI CH VENKATA CHALLA RAO

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 5: GP FOR MINES AND

¶30

GEOLOGY

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent No. 7: —

¶32

The Court made the following order:

¶33

APHC010199072025

¶34

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶35

[3458]

¶36

THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶37

PRESENT

¶38

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶39

WRIT PETITION NO: 10422/2025

¶40

Between:

¶41

1.SABBAVARAPU MAHESHWARA RAO, S/0 LATE MUTHYALA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCC FARMER R/0 51-10-583 BANGARAMMA COLONY SALUR PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT-535 591

¶42

2.SABBAVARAPU KISHORE, S/0 SABBAVARAPU MAHESHWARA RAO AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC FARMER R/O 51-10-583, BANGARAMMA COLONY, SALUR, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT-535 591

¶43

3.VENKATA PAPA RATNAM, VENKATA PAPA RATNAM, W/0. SABBAVARAPU MAHESHWARA RAO AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

¶44

OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. 51-10-583, BANGARAMMA COLONY, SALUR, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT-535 591

¶45

SABBAVARAPU SRIDHAR, S/0. SABBAVARAPU MAHESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/0. 51-10-583, BANGARAMMA COLONY, SALUR, PARVATHIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT - 535 591

¶46

...PETITIONER(S)

¶47

AND

¶48

1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶49

¶50

2.THE DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, THE DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶51

3.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MANYAM DISTRICT.

¶52

4.THE JOINT COLLECTOR, THE JOINT COLLECTOR MANYAM DISTRICT.

¶53

5.THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, MANYAM DISTRICT.

¶54

6.THE TAHSILDAR, SALUR MANDAL, MANYAM DISTRICT.

¶55

7.THALAMANCHALI DHANUNJAYA REDDY, S/0. LATE. T. VENTADA SUBBA REDDY, R/0. D.NO 3/430, P. KOTTAPALLI VILLAGE, PENAGALUR MANDAL ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

¶56

8.NAVADURGA MINING INFRA, NAVADURGA MINING INFRA, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER N. SRINIVASA RAO S/0. SATYANARAYANA (LATE) DOOR NO. 42-1-146, VEDASAMAJAM STREET SALUR VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PARVATIPURAM MANYAM DISTRICT - 535 591

¶57

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶58

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶59

DIVYA.V

¶60

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶61

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶62

2.CH VENKATA CHALLA RAO

¶63

3.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶64

The Court made the following; ORDER:

¶65

Heard Smt. V. Divya, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, learned Assistant^Government

¶66

Pleader for Revenue and the learned counsel appearing^forthe unofficial respondents.

¶67

The grievance of the writ petitioners is that, the respondent No.4 granted quarry lease in respect of the subject lands without obtaining no objections from the petitioners, whose lands have been abutting the quarry lease area.

¶68

It is contended that the petitioners are the absolute owners of the subject property in an extent of Ac.39.00 cents located in Sy.Nos.531 & 82P of Salur Revenue Mandal of P. Konavalasa and Neliparthi Village, Manyam District. The unofficial respondents have applied for stone quarry lease over an extent of 4,429 hectares in Sy.No.82P. The quarry lease was initially granted in the name of respondent No.7 for quarrying road metal and building stone. The same was subsequently transferred in favour of the respondent No.8 for a period of 10 years with effect from 08.01.2024 to 07.01.2034. The petitioners contend that the grant of said quarry license is in violation of the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.108.

¶69

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Tahsildar vide his report, dated 03.06.2024 addressed to the Assistant Director, Mines and Geological Department stated that, the nature of subject land is hillock and Gram Panchayat of Nelliparthi Village did not pass any resolution granting no objection for grant of quarry lease for road metal and building stone and that there are no villages nearby. Thus contends that in the light of the said

¶70

¶71

report of the Tahsildar, it cannot be considered that the petitioners have no objection for issuance of the said licenses in favour of the unofficial respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners further^submits that the petitioners’ lands are within 500 meters from the subject quarry areas and the quarry operations over said area would affect the adjoining lands belonging to the petitioners and would cause damage to the crops.

¶72

Learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for the respondents submit that entire land in Sy.No.82 is the Government land. Since the entire survey number is Government land, there is no necessity to obtain no objection from the petitioner.^{Hefurthersubmitsthat} G.O.Ms.No.107 has been superseded by G.O.Ms.163. In^{termsofthesaid} G.O., the license was rightly granted in favour of the unofficial respondents.

¶73

Learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondent No.8 submits that lease was initially granted in favour of one Thalamanchali Dhanunjaya Reddy - respondent No.7 and subsequently it was transferred in favour of the respondent No.8 and they have installed all safety measures while quarrying and that they have obtained all environmental clearances from the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), and Pollution control Board has also granted Consent to Establish (CTE) and Consent to Operate (CTO). It is further stated that as per the inspection report of the Tahsildar, there is no cultivation by the petitioners.

¶74

Considered the rival submissions. The main grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents ought to have obtained no objection from the petitioners in terms of G.O.Ms.No.107. A perusal of G.O.Ms.No.107, dated 30-07-2016 it reflects that it does not provide for obtaining of no objection from the owners of adjacent lands. Relevant clauses of the said G.O., read as follows;

¶75

“6. In furtherance to the objective of expediting disposal of Mineral concession applications and in supersession of the orders issued in the G.O. vide reference 3 cited, the following instructions are issued for strict compliance by all the officers of the Government at different levels:(i) Immediately after receipt of application, the Assistant Director of Mines & Geology shall fix a date for inspection and survey & demarcation of the area applied for and send one set of application to the Tahsildar concerned to report on the category of the land and availability of the land for grant of Leases, (li) The Tahsildar will send his report to the Assistant Director of Mines & Geology within a period of 30 days duly marking a copy of his report to the District Collector. The report of the Tahsildar, need not be rooted through the intermediate level of Revenue Divisional Officer/ Sub-Collector.

¶76

(Hi) In respect of the Revenue lands adjoining or within 500 mts., distance from the R.F. boundary, the Tahsildar shall issue NOC after obtaining no objection report from the Divisional Forest Officer concerned.

¶77

(iv) In respect of Assigned lands/Patta lands, the Tahsildar shall indicate the names of the Assignees/Pattadars based on the ” latest land records for obtaining consent from them.

¶78

¶79

Having regard to the same, since the subject land is^statedtobe Government land and none of the above contingencies have been pointed out, this Court is not inclined to interfere, to grant the relief as sought by the petitioners. However, it is needless to observe that the unofficial respondent No.8 shall take all safety measures as provided under law, and shall adhere to the license conditions, and shall take all safety and^{environmentalmeasures} while conducting quarry operations.

¶80