Dismissed¶53

Sabbavarapu Maheshwara Rao v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Jul 2025WP/10568/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition 10568/2025, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Kiranmayee Mandava J., 03.07.2025 - quarry lease; road metal and building stone; Sy.No.531, Salur Mandal, Manyam District; M/s Navadurga Stone Crushers; no objection certificate; adjacent/abutting landowners within 500 metres; G.O.Ms.No.107 dated 30-07-2016; superseded by G.O.Ms.163; Government land; Tahsildar report 03.06.2024; hillock; SEIAA environmental clearance; CFE and CFO; writ petition dismissed, no costs.

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. ¶43

Sabbavarapu Maheshwara Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶53

Issue for consideration

Whether the quarry lease granted in favour of respondent No.8 without obtaining no objection from the petitioners, whose lands abut the quarry lease area, is in violation of G.O.Ms.No.107 and warrants interference by the Court. +1 more

¶43

Court's answer

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

¶43

Ratio / Principle

The subject land being Government land, and none of the contingencies contemplated by G.O.Ms.No.107 (NOC for revenue lands adjoining or within 500 m of the R.F. boundary; consent of assignees/pattadars of assigned/patta lands) having been pointed out, the Court is not inclined to interfere or to grant the relief sought by the petitioners.

¶51

Key takeaways

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¶51

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati (Smt. Justice Kiranmayee Mandava), 03.07.2025 - Writ Petition No. 10568/2025 - Quarry lease - G.O.Ms.No.107 - Four petitioners, claiming absolute ownership of Ac.39.00 cents in Sy.Nos.531 & 82P of Salur Revenue Mandal (P. Konavalasa and Neliparthi Village, Manyam District) abutting the quarry area, challenged the grant of a stone quarry lease (road metal and building stone) over 4.00 hectares (Ac.09.88 cents) in Sy.No.531 to M/s Navadurga Stone Crushers (respondent No.8) for 15 years (04.04.2022 to 03.04.2037), alleging it was granted without no objection from them in violation of G.O.Ms.No.107, and relying on the Tahsildar's report dated 03.06.2024 (land is a hillock; no Gram Panchayat resolution of no objection; no villages nearby) and the proximity of their lands within 500 metres of the quarry. The State contended that the entire Sy.No.531 is Government land requiring no No Objection Certificate, and that G.O.Ms.No.107 stands superseded by G.O.Ms.163; respondent No.8 claimed SEIAA environmental clearance and CFE/CFO from the Pollution Control Board, and cited the Tahsildar's inspection report finding no cultivation by the petitioners. Held: G.O.Ms.No.107 does not provide for obtaining no objection from owners of adjacent lands; its clauses require NOC only for revenue lands adjoining or within 500 m of the R.F. boundary and consent of assignees/pattadars of assigned/patta lands - none of which was shown applicable, the subject land being Government land. Writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs, with an observation that respondent No.8 shall take all safety and environmental measures and adhere to licence conditions; pending miscellaneous applications closed.

¶1

[3458]

¶2

APHC010199102025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

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

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 10568/2025

¶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

...PETITIONER(S)

¶14

AND

¶15

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

¶16

¶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 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, MANYAM DISTRICT.

¶21

THE TAHSILDAR, SALUR MANDAL, MANYAM DISTRICT.

¶22

THE TAHSILDAR, PACHIPENTA MANDAL, MANYAM DISTRICT.

¶23

M/S NAVADURGA STONE CRUSHERS, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER N. SRINIVASA RAO, DOOR NO. 42-1-146, VEDASAMAJAM STREET, SALUR VILLAGE AND MANDAL,

¶24

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶26

1.DIVYA.V

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶28

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶29

2.CH VENKATA CHALLA RAO

¶30

3.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶31

The Court made the following:

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

Heard Smt. V. Divya, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and the learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondents.

¶34

The grievance of the writ petitioners is that, the respondent No.4 granted quarry lease in respect of the subject lands without obtaining no

¶35

¶36

objections from the petitioners, whose lands have been abutting the quarry lease area.

¶37

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 respondent has applied for stone quarry lease over an extent of 4.00 hectares (Ac.09.88 cents) in Sy.No.531. The quarry lease was initially granted in the name of respondent No.8 for quarrying road metal and building stone, for a period of 15 years with effect from 04.04.2022 to 03.04.2037. The petitioners contend that the grant of said quarry license is in violation of the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.107.

¶38

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 P. Konavalasa and 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 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.

¶39

¶40

Learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing

¶41

for the respondents submit that entire land in Sy.No.531 is the Government land. Since the entire survey number is Government land, there is no necessity to obtain No Objection Certificate from the petitioner. He further submits that G.O.Ms.No.107 has been superseded by G.O.Ms.163. In terms of the said G.O., the license was rightly granted in favour of the unofficial respondents.

¶42

Learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondent No.8 submits that lease was 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 For Establishment (CFE) and Consent For Operate (CFO). It is further stated that as per the inspection report of the Tahsildar, there is no cultivation by the petitioners.

¶43

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:

¶44

“ 6. In furtherance to the objective of expediting disposal of Mineral concession applications and in supersession of the orders issued in the

¶45

¶46

G.O. vide reference 3^rd cited, the following instructions are issued for strict compliance by all the officers of the Government at different levels:-

¶47

(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.

¶48

(ii) 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.

¶49

(iii) 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.

¶50

(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. ”

¶51

Having regard to the same, since the subject land is stated to be Government land and none of the above contingencies have been pointed, 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 environmental measures while conducting quarry operations.

¶52

¶53