Dismissed

M/s.Ubr Minerals v. Union of India

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Sept 2026WP/33957/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment records the withdrawal procedure of a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by M/S.UBR Minerals regarding proceedings for mining lease approval. The petitioner approached the High Court for a writ of mandamus, albeit indicating an intention to withdraw, and sought dismissal as withdrawn with liberty to avail other remedies. Upon perusing office copies of letters instructing the withdrawal of the writ petition, the Bench accorded permission to withdraw. The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to avail remedies, if any, available. No order as to costs was passed, and pending miscellaneous petitions stood closed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to petitioner to avail remedies, if any available. No order as to costs.

M/s.Ubr Minerals Vs Union of India — Mining and Natural Resources | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

RC,J W.P. N o.33957 of 2025

¶2

¶3

APHC010655932025

¶4

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

¶5

[3332]

¶6

TUESDAY, T HE 15^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 33957/2025

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/S.UBR MINERALS , REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER P. UDAYA BHASKARA D.NO.27-1-1642, LAKSHMINAGAR BAL A JINAGAR, SPSR NELLORE DIS T RICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF MINES, REP. BY ITS SE C RETARY GOVT, OF INDIA SHASTRI BHAVAN,DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD NEW DELHI-110001.

¶14

THE STATE OF A N DHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS P RINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GO V ERNMENT, DEPARTMENT INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE (MINES), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELA G APUDI.

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

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 pleased topleased to iss u e a writ of MANDAMUS declaring impugned proceedings No.5/80/200 4 -MV dated. 27.06.2006 returning/r e jecting the proposal for conveying pri o r approval as required under Section 5(1) of the MMDR Act, 1957 in respect of Grant of Mining Lease for Iron Ore and Quartz as illegal, arbitrary and in v i olative of Article 14 of the Constitution o f India and consequently Respondent No.1 to re-consider the proposal dated, 15-102004 for conveying prior approval as required under Section 5(1) of the MMDR Act, 1957 with o ut reference to the impugned p roceedings

¶17

RC,J W.P.No.33957 of 2025

¶18

¶19

No.5/80/2004-MV, dated, 27.06.2006 issued by Respondent No.1 and setaside the same and pass

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶21

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 Respondent No.1 to re-consider the proposal dated, 1510- 2004 for conveying prior approval as required under Section 5(1) of the MMDR Act, 1957 without reference to the proceedings No.5/80/2004- MV, dated, 27.06.2006 issued by Respondent No.1 pending disposal of WP and pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶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 May be pleased to grant leave to the respondent No.2 to file the counter affidavit in WP.No.33957/2025 and pass

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.G RAJA BABU

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.G.ARUN SHOWRI(CENTRAL GOVT. COUSEL)

¶28

2.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶29

The Court made the following:

¶30

ORDER

¶31

Sri Goda Raja Babu, learned counsel for petitioner, submitted that the

¶32

writ petitioners addressed him a letter dated 12.08.2026 instructing him to withdraw the writ petition and accordingly he addressed a letter dated 13.08.2026 to the Registry expressing his intention to withdraw the writ

¶33

RC,J W.P.No.33957 of 2025

¶34

¶35

petition and prayed to dismiss the writ petition as withdrawn granting liberty to the petitioner to avail remedies, if any, available.

¶36

Perused office copies of the letters placed across the Bench.

¶37

Permission as sought is accorded.

¶38

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty

¶39

to the petitioner to avail remedies, if any available. There shall be no order as

¶40

to costs.

¶41

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶42

__________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 15^th September, 2026. RR

M/s.Ubr Minerals v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Ubr Minerals v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases