Bodduru Bhusana, Vs The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue appropriate order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare Section 10A (1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation)^{AmendmentAct,} 2015 (Act No.10 of 2015) as no application to the prospecting license

¶17

ft

¶18

application dated 09-08-2011 of the petitioner and^{furtherdeclarethatSec.} 10A (1) of Act No. 10 of 2015 is not retrospective in its application and consequently, set aside the proceedings of the 3rd Respondent in Memo.No.1515/M-lll(2)/2016, dated 09-03-2016 as it illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and further direct to Respondent No.1 and 2 to re-consider the application of the petitioner dated 09-08-2011 for grating prospecting license. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 23850 OF 2016) Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.1 and 2 not to proceed further for grating prospecting license to third parties in Sy.No.5 admeasuring Ac.200 in Padmapuram Village, Pachipenta^Mandal.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G UMA PRASAD REPRESENTING SRI S.V.S KRISHNA PRASAD

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 5: GP FOR MINES^ANDGEOLOGY

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI HARINATH N (DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA)

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

APHC010372512016

¶24

[3310]

¶25

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

¶26

MONDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶27

PRESENT

¶28

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶29

WRIT PETITION NO: 19441/2016

Between:

Bodduru Bhusana,

...PETITIONER

AND

The Union Of India Rep By Its Secretary and Others

¶35

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶36

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶37

1.S.V.S KRISHNA PRASAD

¶38

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶39

1.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY (AP)

¶40

2.HARINATH N (DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA)

¶41

The Court made the following order:

¶42

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the^Constitution of

¶43

India, seeking the following relief;

¶44

I

¶45

“....to issue appropriate order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare Section 10A (1( of the Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Amendment Act ,2015 as no application to the prospecting license application dated 09.08.2011 of the petitioner and further declare that Sec.lOA 1 of Act No. 10 of 2015 is not retrospective in its application and

¶46

T

¶47

consequently set aside the proceedings of the 3^^ Respondent in Memo No 1515/M 1112/2016 dated 09.03.2016 as it illegal arbitrary and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and further direct to Respondent No. 1 and 2 to reconsider the application of the petitioner dated 09.08.2011 for grating prospecting license and pass. .. ”

¶48

On hearing, Mr G.Uma Prasad, learned counsel representing^on behalf of Mr S.V.S.Krishna Prasad, learned counsel^{forthepetitionersubmits} that learned counsel for the petitioner has given No-Objection^Vakalattothe petitioner long back.

¶49

Upon perusal of the material on record, this writ^{petitionisfiledin} the year 2016. After a lapse of 8 years, even the learned^{counselforthe} petitioner on record has given No-Objection Vakalat^{tothepetitioner,} till date the petitioner has not taken any steps either to engage^{anewcounselorto} appear in person to prosecute the case. It seems that^{thepetitionerhasno} interest in prosecuting the case.

¶50