Mohit Granites Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

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

¶2

MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 2444 OF 2025

¶6

Between:

¶7

M/s. Mohit Granites, Sy.No.11/6p,7,8,10P, Dheenabhandupuram Village, Meliaputi Mandal, Srikakulam District, Represented by its Partner. Dharampal Choudhary. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Department of Mines and Geology, Secretariat building at Velagapudi. 2. Divisional Mines & Geology Officer, Tekkali, Srikakulam District. ...RESPONDENTS 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, order or direction, especially oneⁱⁿ the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the Demand Notice No. 1497/MDL/2022-2 dt. 12.06.2023 issued by Respondent No.2 without considering the reply given by the petitioner for the Show cause notice dt.16.08.2022 and thereby insisting the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.48,99,335/- towards penalty as arbitrary, illegal in violation of Principles of Natural Justice without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14 & 19 of Constitution of India and contrary to APMMC Rules, 1966 consequently set aside^the same.

¶8

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶9

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 suspend the Demand Notice No. 1497/M DL/2022-2 dt. 12.06.2023 issued by Respondent No.2, Pending disposal of the Writ Petition?

¶10

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.SAI NAVEEN FOR M/s.UTTARA LEGAL Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: ASST.GP FOR MINES &

¶11

GEOLOGY

¶12

The Court made the following: ORDER

1

[3310]

APHC010033712025

HEja

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶18

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶19

MONDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶20

PRESENT

¶21

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶22

WRIT PETITION NO: 2444/2025

Between:

Mohit Granites

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶28

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶30

UTTARA LEGAL

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent{S):

¶32

1.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶33

The Court made the following:

¶34

ORDER:

¶35

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

¶36

seeking the following relief:

¶37

“ declaring the Demand Notice No.1497/MDU2022-2. dt.^12.06.2023 issued by Respondent No. 2 without considering the reply given by the petitioner for the Show cause notice dt.16.08.2022 and thereby insisting the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.48,99,335/- towards penalty as arbitrary, illegal, in violation of Principles of Natural Justice, without jurisdiction and violative of Article 14 and 19 of Constitution of India and contrary to APMMC

¶38

2

¶39

Rules, 1966, consequently set aside the same and pass^{suchotherorderor} orders ”

¶40

Heard Mr.K.Sai Naveen, learned counsel for the petitioner^and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, appearing for the respondents.

¶41

On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits^thatthe matter is squarely covered by the order passed by this^Courtin W.P.No.1645 of 2025, dated 24.01.2025, and hence, requests this Court to pass similar order in this petition also. The operative portion of the said order is as follows:-

¶42

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the teamed Assistant Government Pteader for Mines and Geology, the 1^^ respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the Revision filed by the petitioner, dated 12.06.2023 within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶43

With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed^of at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶44

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, appearing for the respondents opposed for grant of any relief in the writ petition and prayed to dismiss the same.

¶45

In view of the submission made by both learned counsels and upon perusing the entire material available on record, this Court deems fit to dispose of the present Writ Petition in terms of the said order.

¶46

3

¶47

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed in W.P.No.1645 of 2025, dated 24.01.2025. There shall be no order as

¶48

to costs.

¶49

The Registry is directed to attach a copy of the order passed in W.P.No.1645 of 2025, dated 24.01.2025, to this order.

¶50

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

¶51

closed.

¶52

//TRUE COPY//

¶53

SDl- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR

¶54

SEC OFFICER

¶55

To,

¶56

The Principal Secretary Department of Mines & Geology,^Stateof Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Amaravati,^Guntur District.

¶57

The Divisional Mines & Geology Officer, Tekkali, Srikakulam District.

¶58

One CC to M/s. Uttara Legal, Advocate [OPUC]

¶59

One CC to Sri K.Sai Naveen, Advocate [OPUC]

¶60

Two CCs to GP for Mines & Geology, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶61

Three CD Copies.

¶62

( Along with the Copy of the Order in WP.No.1645 of 2025 dated 24.01.2025) gi

HIGH COURT

DATED:03/02/2025

ORDER

WP.No.2444 of 2025

I 1 <1 FEB 2125 Co,
^ . Current Section . ^

¶68

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶69

1^'

¶70

APHC010031542025

¶71

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶72

AT AMARAVATI

¶73

[3310]

¶74

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶75

FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶76

PRESENT

¶77

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶78

WRIT PETITION NO: 1645/2025

Between:

Tirumala Granites

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradeshq and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶84

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶85

UTTARA LEGAL

¶86

Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR I^INES AND GEOLOGY

¶87

The Court made the following:

¶88

ORDER

¶89

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for

¶90

the following relief;-

¶91

.. pleased to issue a Writ order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Demand Notice No.1497/MDU2022-6, dt 12.06.2023 issued by Respondent No. 2 without considering the reply given by the petitioner for the Show cause notice dt 12.09.2022 and thereby insisting the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.16,80,572/- towards penalty as arbitrary, illegal in violation of Principles of

¶92

Natural Justice without jurisdiction and violative^ofArticle 14 and 19 of Constitution of India and contrary to^APMMC Rules, 1966 consequently set aside the same and pass....

¶93

The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner is a Partnership firm and was granted a Mineral dealer license (for short ‘the MDL’) on 09.10.2018 by the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology,^{Srikakulamfora} period of 20 years. Thereafter, 2"^^ respondent had issued a show-cause notice on 16.08.2022 wherein it was mentioned that the technical staff had visited the petitioner’s unit on 06.04.2022 and reported that there are 3 number of raw granite blocks of 301 cbm. As per the inspection report, the difference quantity is 4 cbm available in the MDL unit of the petitioner. In response to the same, the petitioner has submitted explanation on 12.09.2022 explaining the reasons. Thereafter, Respondent No.2 has passed the impugned demand notice, dated 12.06.2023 imposing a penalty of Rs. 16,80,572/- which is inclusive of normal seignorage fee, consideration amount, five times penalty, DMF and MERIT in exercise of power under Rule 26(3) (ii) of APMMC Rules. The petitioner was advised^{tofilerevisionbefore} the Government and accordingly, the petitioner filed^{revisionon23.08.2023.} During pendency of the Revision, Respondent No.2 is threatening to take action against the demand notice, dated 12.06.2023. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed.

¶94

Heard Mr K.Sai Naveen, learned counsel representing^onbehalf of Uttara Legal for petitioner and Smt Sudeepthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for the respondents.

¶95

On hearing, while reiterating the averments made in^WritPetition learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aggrieved by the Demand Notice, dated 12.06.2023, the petitioner has filed revision before the 1 St respondent. During pendency of the said Revision, the 2"^"^ respondent is proceeding to take steps in pursuance of the impugned Demand Notice, dated 12.06.2023 which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence,^{thelearnedcounselfor} the petitioner requests to pass appropriate orders.

¶96

Smt Sudeepthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader^forMines and Geology appearing for the respondents opposed for grant of any relief in this Writ Petition and prayed to dismiss the same.

¶97

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, the 1 St respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the^{Revisionfiledbythe} petitioner, dated 12.06.2023 within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶98

With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed^ofatthe stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶99

n

¶100

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

¶101

closed.

¶102

DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.

¶103

Date: 24.01.2025 TM

Mohit Granites v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit Granites v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yelukolu Venkateswarlu Vs State of Ap

M/s. Jai Jeenmata Granites, Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

S.D. Shyam Sundar, Vs The Project Director and District Water

M/s. Snark Technologies, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Madhusha, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Rangani Padmavathi Vs State of Andhra Pradesh