A petitioner challenged the quarter and destruction inaction by respondents in disposing of a quarry lease application. The High Court held the cause of action no longer survives and dismissed the writ petition as infructuous without costs.
No order was as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3300 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO: 1532'l OF 2011
Between:
M/s. Ganga Granites, rep. by its lvlanaging Partner, Sri S. Laxman Rao, S/o. Late Bheemanna Rao, aged about 61 years, H.No. 3-4-142110, Barkatpura, Hyderabad 500 029
...PETiTIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more so one in the nature of mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the respondent Nos.'1 to 3 in not disposing of the quarry lease application dated 11.02.2011 of the petitioner firm made in an extent of 11.0 Hectares in Sy.No. 1120 of Katikenapalli Village, Dharmaram Mandal, Karimnagar District in a time bound manner as required under law as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the rules made thereunder apart from being violative of Article'14 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondent No.1 to implement the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.'181, lndustries and Commerce (Mines-l) Department dated 28.05.'1998 in the interest of Mineral Development, Iaw and justice-
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 18381 0F 2011)
Petition under Section i 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the'l st respondent to send his 'No objection certificate, report to the 2nd respondent directly informing about the classification and availabli\r o1 1,.,",rn0 applied for by the petitioner firm in its apprication dated 11 .o2.1!.011 as per G.o.Ms.No 1B1, rndustries & commerce (Mines-r) Department datec 28.05..r998 failing which the petitioner firm herein wourd suffer irreparabre ross ancr hardship.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI pANNALA SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondents: Gp FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY
The Court made the following: ORDER
i I i I I
I
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI(A
WRIT PETITIONNO.15321 ot2OLt
ORDER:
I-earned counser for the petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ
petition does not survive
Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ petition, shall
stand closed
SD/-G.SIREESHA
ASSISTANTREGISPAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To
1 2. . TwoOne CC CCsto SRI PANNALA SRINIVAS, toGp FOR fr/lrrrfL'S nUo'eEoL-O-CV, dYo^c.qtg.[O.PUCIHlghCourt for the State of Telangana, atHYderabad. [OUT]
PSK.tts*
HIGH COURT
DATED:1011112023
ORDER
WP.No.15321 of 2011
1 i-iE !;-1P' r€, o
(
v
c I E 0tt 2[?3
u
,+
,
r; rr
* cs sr'r,5
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS.
\N)
1.1-\a
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s. Ganga Granites, rep. by S. Laxman Rao
Tahsildar, Dharmaram
Assistant Director of Mines and Geology
Director of Mines and Geology
Nagesh Bheemapaka
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
