Disposed

M/s Buildmate Metal Industries v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Sept 2021WP/22601/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition and interim application in *M/s Buildmate trrletal lndustries v. State of Telangana* concerned the delayed processing of a representation for a quarry lease by the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology due to the pandemic. The court disposed of the matter by directing the respondent to dispose of the representation within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology to consider the representation and pass orders within eight weeks.

M/s Buildmate Metal Industries Vs The State of… — Environment and Pollution | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEN/BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 22601 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s Buildmate trrletal lndustries, Rep. by its Proprietor, IV. Swapna W/o. M. Venkataprasad, age 42 years, R/o.Plot No.7-'1-G9, Flat No.Gg, Road No.SF, Panchavati Colony, Manikonda, Near lVlana Studio, R.R. District - 500089.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, rep. by its Secretary, lndustries and Commerce Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶12

The Director of lvlines and Geology, Government of Telangana, Hyderabad 3. The Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Nizamabad Region, Nizamabad District.

¶13

The Assistant Director of lvlines and Geology, Sangareddy, Sanga Reddy District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 oI lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be^pleased to issue writ, order or direction more^particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF I/ANDAIUUS, action of the Respondent No.3 in not passing orders of Grant for Road Metal on the Representation / Letter of the Petitioner d1.0110212021 submitted along with all the approvals in pursuant to proposals to grant in Proceedings No.1873/QL/SRD/2019, Dt. 1210912019 in over an extent oI 1.528 Hects in Sy.No.138 and 139, Khajipally Village, Jinnaram Mandal, Sanga Reddy District as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, un co nstitutio na I in violation of^principles of natural^justice and Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and T.S. Minor Mineral Concession Rules,^'1966.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶17

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 3rd respondent Deputy Director of [Vlines and Geology, Hyderabad to^pass orders on the representalion d1.011021202 1 granting^quarry lease for over an extent of 1.528 Hects in Sy.No.138 and 139, Khajipally Village, Jinnaram Mandal, Sanga Reddy District, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. P. VIJAYA LAKSHMI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^K.LAKSHMAN

¶21

WRIT PETITION No.226O1 OF 2O2l

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the^{petitioner and the learned} Government Pleader for Mines and GeoloS'^{for the respondents.} With their consent, this Writ Petition is^{disposedof at the stage of} admission.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that though^the petitioner has submitted representation on⁰¹ .O2.2O21 to the^third respondent duly enclosing all necessary approvals,^{requesting to grant} quarry lease, no orders are passed thereon till date. Hence, he seeks^a direction to the third respondent to dispose^{of the said representation} at the earliest.

¶25

Learned Government Pleader, on instructions,^{would state that} due to Covid- 19 pandemic situation and the^subsequent lockdown and also various administrative exigencies,^the representation submitted by the^pqtitioner on^{Ol .O2.2021} could not be considered and seeks some more time^{for passing} necessary orders thereon.

¶26

In view of the above made submissions, the Writ^{Petition is} disposed of directing the third respondent-Deput1,^{Director of} Mines and Geolory, Nizamabad Region,^Nizamabad District,^to consider the representation submitted by the^petitioneron O1.O2.2021, and pass necessary orders thereon,^{strictly in accordance} with 1aw, as expeditiously as possible,^preferably within a^period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to mention that the third respondent before^passingany order shall put the petitioner on notice and afford it an opportunity of

¶27

¶28

hearing. A copy of the order passed by the third respondent shall

¶29

be communicated to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶30

Miscellaneous Petitions pending in this writ petition, if any,

¶31

shall also stand closed in the light of this final order.

¶32

SD/. I. NAGALAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

,TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

l.TheSecretary,lndustriesandCommerceDept',stateofTelangana,Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶37

z. 5. illre iii; Director of b;p|.;ii^-oiieci"i Mines^{and Geology, Government br"v]iJ' iiio c'eoiosv,} 'rulzamauia^{of Telangana'} Regi6n'^Hyderabad Nizamabad

¶38

District.

¶39

+. in-e Asiistunt Director^{of Minesand Geology,-sangareddy, Sanga Reddy District} s. on" C-C to^{ttrtls. e. vijaya Lakshmi, Advocate [QPUCI}

¶40

iil CCs to^{Cp for Minesind Geology, High-Court fbr the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶41

Two CD CoPies

¶42

One S^pare Copy

sr1.) tp

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1610912021

111 g srArg
.)-
Y
e (-\
oo 25 SEP2BE1 rlLl,C)
*
<c * ,/
oiis r--

¶47

ORDER

¶48

WP.No.22601 of 2021

¶49

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

¶50

ql)
x, l 1

M/s Buildmate Metal Industries v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Buildmate Metal Industries v. The State of Telangana

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

Mohammad Arshad Vs The State of Telangana

Kanurnuri Raghurama Krishna Raju Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Sri Vensai Metal Vs The State of Telangana

Merugu Srinivas Goud Vs State of Telangana

Sama Jagan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Tabassum Naaz Vs The State of Telangana