Allowed

K.Ravindra REddy v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of

Telangana HC17 Dec 2009WP/27589/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this special original jurisdiction writ petition, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that the petitioner was entitled to the relief of a writ of mandamus. The court granted the prayer to declare the failure to execute the lease deed illegal and directed the respondents to execute the same. Costs were not awarded.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondents to execute the registered lease deed in favour of the petitioner granting the right to quarry Ordinary Sand.

K.Ravindra REddy Vs The Government… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE

¶3

PRESENT:

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.27589 of 2009

¶6

Between:

¶7

K. Ravindra Reddy

¶8

..... PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Industries and Commerce (SPIU & SAND), Secreteriat, Hyderabad rep. by its Secretary and two others

¶11

..... RESPONDENTS

¶12

ORDER:

¶13

Heard the learned counsel.

¶14

2. The matter is coming up for admission.

¶15

3. The writ petition is filed praying for the relief of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the third respondent in not executing the lease deed pursuant to the confirmation orders dated 05-12-2009 passed by the second respondent granting right to quarry Ordinary Sand in reach number 35 in Penna River within the village limits of Sangam Village and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of the procedure contemplated under the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 and consequently direct the respondents to execute

¶16

the registered lease deed in favour of the petitioner granting the right of quarry Ordinary Sand in reach number 35 in Penna River within the village limits of Sangam Village and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District and pass such other suitable orders.

¶17

4. Several facts had been narrated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. It is stated that the third respondent issued public auction notice on 18-04-2009 for conducting auction for grant of leasehold rights for quarrying sand. The Deputy Director submitted Ground Water Clearance Report. It is stated that the petitioner paid the entire amount and the second respondent issued confirmation orders on 05-12-2009, but the leasehold right is not being executed.

¶18

5. In the light of the facts and circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion that the writ petitioner in entitled for the relief prayed for in the writ petition.

¶19

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of granting relief prayed for in the writ petition. No order as to costs.

¶20

P.S. NARAYANA, J

¶21

December 17, 2009. Pn

¶22

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.27589 of 2009

¶24

December 17, 2009

K.Ravindra REddy v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Ravindra REddy v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chamarthi Ramachandra Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

G. Sattaiah, Vs The District Collector

The Grampanchayat, Baddipudi Village, Ulavapadu Mandal, Vs The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary

Vemuri Jhansi, Vs The District Co-operative Officer Gudivawada

M.Vnekat Reddy Vs The Shamshabad Grampanchayat

K. Paneer Selvan, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh