Dismissed¶41

E. Prasada Rao, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC3 Feb 2026WP/5352/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati, Writ Petition No. 5352 of 2014, decided 04.02.2026 by Justice Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda. E. Prasada Rao v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and others. Quarry lease for black granite and gravel, 5.0000 hects., Sy.No.381/44, Yedavali village, Chilakaluripet mandal, Guntur district, 20-year lease. Mandamus under Article 226 for non-consideration of application; counter cited G.O.Ms.No.2 dated 02.01.2013 and requirement of Joint Mining Cooperative Society for DKT lands; application subsequently considered and rejected; writ petition dismissed as infructuous, no costs; no case law cited.

What did the court decide?

In view of the rejection of the petitioner's quarry lease application, no cause survives and no further orders are necessary. ¶40

E. Prasada Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

[3329]

¶2

APHC010552292014

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 5352/2014

¶8

Between:

¶9

E. PRASADA RAO,, S/O. GOVINDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. FLAT NO. 405, SRIRAMA RESIDENCY, 3RD LINE, SYAMALA NAGAR, GUNTUR TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINES & GEOLOGY DEPARTMNET, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶13

THE DIRECTOR OF MINES GEOLOGY, ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD.

¶14

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF MINES GEOLOGY, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶15

THE COLLECTOR DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶16

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARASARAOPETA, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶17

THE TAHSILDAR, CHILAKALURIPETA, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

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 toto issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in nature of

¶20

¶21

Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner's application for grant of quarry lease for black granite and gravel over an extent of 5.0000 hects. in Sy.No.381/44 of Yedavali village, Chilakaluripet mandal, Guntur district for a period of 20 years is illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 6 to process the petitioner's application for grant of quarry lease for black granite and gravel over an extent of 5.0000 hects. in Sy.No.381/44 of Yedavali village, Chilakaluripet mandal, Guntur district for a period of 20 years and to pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 6643 OF 2014

¶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 to direct the respondents 2 to 6 to process the petitioner's application for grant of quarry lease for black granite and gravel over an extent of 5.0000 hects. in Sy.No.381/44 of Yedavali village, Chilakaluripet mandal, Guntur district for a period of 20 years forthwith in pursuant to the letter No.3236/Q/2013, Dt.24.05.2013 pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.N ASWARTHA NARAYANA

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶28

2.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶29

The Court made the following:

¶30

¶31

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶32

WRIT PETITION NO:5352 OF 2014

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶35

The case of the petitioner herein is that even though the petitioner submitted his application for grant of quarry lease for black granite and gravel over an extent of Ac.5.0000 hects. in Sy.No.381/44 of Yedavali Village, Chilakaluripet Mandal, Guntur District. But for reason or the other, the respondents not granted the lease and not considered the application of the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition.

¶36

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for the respondents filed counter affidavit, herein, it is stated as follows:

¶37

“ A society in the name of Joint Mining Cooperative society has to form, where large chunk of DKT lands are proposed for mining and the society has to take up the mining activities as per the existing rules. In the event of joint cooperative society not in a position to do so, arrangements should be made to pay royalty to the assignees. Hence, it is not possible to grant quarry lease directly to the petitioner without following due procedure as envisaged in the G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 02.01.2013 .”

¶38