Dismissed

Lekcon Infrastructure Private Limited v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Nov 2023WP/26517/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging proceedings without costs. The Court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust the alternative statutory remedy of filing a revision under Rule 35-A of the Telangana State Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, before approaching this Court.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the petitioner to file a revision under Rule 35-A of the Telangana State Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966.

Lekcon Infrastructure Private Limited Vs The… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰⁰ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 26517 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Lekcon lnfrastructure Private Limited, Having its office 3-6/9, Narsingi Heights, Post and Village, Narsingi, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, rep. by its Authorized Signatory Gunnam Archan Kumar S/o G.Rama Krishna Aged 43 Yrs, Occ. Dy.lvlanager (Admin).

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary-Cum- Revisional Authority, (Mines and Geology) lndustries and Commerce (Mines-l) Department, Dr. BR Ambedkar Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶12

2 The Director of ltrlines and Geology, Government of Telangana, BRKR Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad

¶13

J The Dy. Director of Mines and Geology, Ranga Reddy Region, At Hyderabad

¶14

4 The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Thandur, Vikarabad District

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 ol 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 particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing impugned proceedings No.371366iVKBlAH|2O19, d1.12.O1 .2023 is bad, void, illegal, without authority and^jurisdiction as power not traceable, on^par MMDR Act and TSIVIMC Rules, 1966 and consequently set aside the same.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶18

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 suspend the impugned proceedings No.37'1366/VKB|AHl2019, d1.12.01.2023 issued by the 2nd respondent.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI P.PRADEEP KUMAR REDDY

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶21

The Gourt made the followtng: ORDER

¶22

rt.

¶23

¶24

THE H NOURABLE RI USTI E NAGES H^BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION^{N0.26517 0t 2023}

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This writ^{petition is filed seekingthe followingrelief:}

¶27

\ \

¶28

"fo issue o writ, order^{or directionmoreporticulorly} one in lhe^{noture of writ of Mondomusdecloring} .^{the oction ofthe Znd respondent in rssuing} impugned^{proceedingsNo'37l366lvKB/AH/2019'} doled 12.01.2023^{is bod, void' itlegol'without} outhority^ond iurisdictic)n^{os power not troceoble'} on por MMDAr^{Acl and ISMMC Rules'1966 ond} conseguenllY^{sel oside lhe some"}

¶29

When the motter^{is token up for heoring'leorned} Governmeni^{Pleoder for Mines & Geology oppeoringfor} resPondenl^{Nos.lto 4 hos submiJted thot in the impugned} No.371366/VKBIAH/2019^{doted 12'01 '2023 lhe} proceedings petitioner^{wos odvisedto file revisionbefore the Government} under Rule^{35-A of the TelongonoStote Minor Minerol} Concession^{Rules, 1966.But the petitioner withoulovolling the} soid remedy,^{stroightowoyopproochedthis Court by filing the} present writ Petition.

)

'. 1

ln view of the oforesoid submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of direcling the petitioner to opprooch lhe Governmeni by filing revision under Rule 35-A of the

¶35

Telongono Slote Minor Minerol Concession Rules. 1966. Ihere sholl be no order os to costs.

¶36

Miscelloneous opplicotions, if ony pending, sholl olso

¶37

stond closed

¶38

SD/. MOHD. SANAULLAH ANSARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/I

¶39

;" SECTION OFFICER

¶40

To,

¶41

The Principal Secretary-Cum- Revisional Authority, (Mines and Geology) lndustries and Commerce (Mines-l) Department, State of Telangana, Dr. BR Am bed karTe la ng a n a Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶42

The Director of Mines and Geology, Government of Telangana, BRKR Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad

¶43

The Dy. Director of Mines and Geology, Ranga Reddy Region, At Hyderabad

¶44

The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Thandur, Vikarabad District

¶45

One CC to SRI P.PRADEEP KUMAR REDDY, Advocate. [OPUC]

¶46

Two CCs to GP FOR NIINES AND GEOLOGY, High Cou( for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶47

Two CD Copies. BSK GJP

,wq

HIGH COURT

DATED:1611112023

ORDER

1HE SI4t €
{
a-
/ '
1E rEr 2023 e
*

¶53

WP.No.26517 ot 2023

¶54

DISPOSING OF THE^{WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT COSTS

Lekcon Infrastructure Private Limited v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lekcon Infrastructure Private Limited 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

M/s. Murali Manpower Agencies Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.

Natuva Kavitha Vs The State of Telangana

United India Insurance Company Limited, Vs G.Sandhya

Saraswathi Bai, Vs Apcpdcl

Daka Srinivasula Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Dilip Buildcon Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana