P Rajasekhar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

P RAJASEKHAR, S / O. P. CHENGA REDDY, AGED A BOUT 46 YEARS, R/O.D.N O .8-76, RAMAPURAM VILLAGE, G U NDRAJU KUPPAM POST, NAGARI MANDAL, CHITTOOR, C HITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF A N DHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS P RINCIPAL SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES COMMERCE (MINES) DEP A RTMENT, A.P SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THE COMMISSION E R AND DIRECTOR OF MINES G EOLOGY, IBRAHIMPATNAM, N T R DISTRICT.

¶15

THE DISTRICT MI N ES AND GEOLOGY OFFICER, IN D USTRIAL ESTATE, PUTTUR R O AD, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶16

THE A P MINERAL D EVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMI T ED, REP., BY ITS VICE C HAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, VIJAYAWADA, NTR D ISTRICT.

¶17

THE TAHSILDAR, N A GARI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRIC T .

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prayin g that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be

¶20

2

¶21

pleased toPleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3RD respondent in not considering and disposing of my application dt.22.09.2017 with respect to subject land admeasuring an extent of 2.714 hectares situated in Sy.No.54/17 of Gundraju kuppam, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Art. 14, 19 and 21 of constitution of India and contrary to provisions of Minor Minerals (Development and regulation) Act, 1957 and AP Minor Mineral concession Rules, 1966 and consequently direct the respondents to grant quarry lease in favour of the petitioner for the land admeasuring an extent of 2.714 hectares situated in Sy.No.54/17 of gundraju kuppam, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District strictly in consonance with rule 12 (2-A) of AP Minor Mineral concession rules, 1966 and pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶23

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 Pleased to direct the respondents to consider the application dt.22.09.2017 for grant of quarry lease pertaining to land of an extent of 2.714 hectares situated in Sy.No.54/17 of Gundraju kuppam, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.KANAKALA DEVI PRASANNAKUMAR

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶28

2.N JEEVAN KUMAR

¶29

3.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶30

3

¶31

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶32

WRIT PETITION NO: 22973 OF 2025

¶33

The Court made the following order:

¶34

Heard Sri K.Devi Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Sudeepthi Potluri, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3, Sri N.Jeevan Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.4 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.5.

¶35

The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3^rd respondent has not considered the application dated 22.09.2017, submitted by the petitioner for the granting of a quarry lease for road metal, building stone and gravel for a period of 15 years over an extent of 3.00 hectares in Survey No.54 of Gundraju Kuppam, Nagari Mandal, Chittoor District (hereinafter referred to as "the subject land").

¶36

It is contended that the 5^th respondent, after conducting the enquiry, submitted a report to the 3^rd respondent vide proceedings dated 15.11.2018, stating that the subject land is not fit for cultivation and is suitable only for quarrying purposes. The 5^th respondent stated "no objection" to the grant of a quarry lease in favour of the petitioner and also issued a NOC after following the due procedure prescribed under the applicable rules. The petitioner was asked to deposit premium amount equivalent to 10 times of annual dead rent in terms of G.O.Ms.No.65 dated 04.08.2021. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.23065 of 2021 for a declaration that

¶37

4

¶38

the amendments made to the provisions of APMMC Rules, 1966 are only prospective and cannot be given a retrospective effect. The said writ petition along with other batch of writ petitions was dismissed. However, the Court observed that the Rule, stipulating that the pending applications are ineligible, should not be given retrospective effect power. The 3^rd respondent vide his proceedings dated 03.05.2024 declared the quarry lease application filed by the petitioner as ineligible. Against the same, the petitioner filed a representation before the respondents. In the interregnum the government issued G.O.Ms.No.100 Industries and Commerce (Mines-II) Department, dated 26.06.2025.

¶39

Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the Government of Andhra Pradesh vide G.O.Ms.No.100, issued certain amendments to the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966. Incorporating Sub-Rule 2-A to Rule 12 of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, which reads as follows:

¶40

“(2-A) Disposal of pending applications:-

¶41

i) Notwithstanding anything stated in these rules, all applications filed for grant of Quarry Lease for minor minerals listed in Schedule IV and are pending as on 13.03.2022 shall become eligible, irrespective of any ineligible orders issued after the introduction of Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Auction Rules, 2022 subject to the area applied was free and not covered in the orders issued for auction/nomination/allotment.”

¶42

Today, when the matter is taken up for admission, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 submitted that the area applied for by the petitioner, covering an extent of

¶43

5

¶44

0.460 hectares, is partly overlapping with the area allocated to M/s. APMDC Ltd., on a nominated basis. However, the remaining extent of 2.254 hectares is free from and is available to grant in favour of the petitioner. The application filed by the petitioner will be considered and grant to the extent of the available area (2.254 hectares) in accordance with the amended A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966.

¶45

Having regard to the submissions made, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 3^rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the application dated 22.09.2017 of the petitioner in respect of the subject land, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 12(2-A) of the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, and in terms of G.O.Ms.No.100, Industries and Commerce (Mines-II) Department, dated 26.06.2025, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶46