Allowed

Sri S. Govardhan Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Sept 2024WP/25745/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside the Respondent's order rejecting a mining lease application, holding it violative of natural justice principles. The Respondent was directed to issue a fresh show cause notice and provide a personal hearing within four weeks, complying with prior orders.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; directed to issue fresh show cause notice and afford opportunity of personal hearing within four weeks.

Sri S. Govardhan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

L I : i ! t i I I I I It I I

¶2

: I I: II

¶3

I II i i I i

¶4

HIGH COURT FOR^{THESTATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

THURSDAY,^{THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY FOUR}

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKARREDDY}

¶8

WRIT PETITION 25745²⁰²⁴

¶9

Between:

¶10

Sri S. Govardhan^ReddY,S/o Venkat Reddy,^{Age 45 years, OccuB-usiness,} Ri/o.Mudhi ReddYPallY^village' najJpur Mandal^{(!rstwhile BalanagarMandal),} District, Telangana^State.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

1 . The State of^{Telangana, Repby its Principal Secretary-9u.m-RS'1191----.} Authority,^{(MinesaGeolooy) lndustries and Commerce (Mmes-l)uepanrnenr'} dor"mrii"ht ot tetanganii^{'8thftoor, BRKR Bhawan, Tank Bund,secretariat,} Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶14

2.TheDirectorofMinesandGeology,GovernmentofTelangana'2ndFloor'My Homes Sarovar Complex,^{Hyderabad, Telangana-}

¶15

The Dy. Director^{of Mines and Geology, Hyderabad,Telangana'}

¶16

4.TheAssistantDirectorofMinesandGeology,RangaReddy'Hyderabad' Telangana.

¶17

Sri. A. Veeresh^{Babu, S/o.A.Raghavulu, Plot No225, RoadNo"l2' Gunrock} Enclave, Secunderabad-500009'

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

pleased to issue a writ,^{orderor direction more particularly one in the natwe} of writ of MANDAMUS^{challenging the actionof the RespondentNo'1 in passing} theimpugnedrevisionordervideMemoNo'7142tu.1(2)t2o1a,dt.0610312024 rejectingtheminingleaseapplicationbydismissingtherevisionapplicationfiled bythewritpetitionerisimproper,unreasoned,arbilrary,illegalandUnconstitutional and consequently^{set aside the MemoNo Tl42fiin\/2018'dt'06/03'/issuedby} the RespoMent^{No.1 with the directionto considerthe grant of mining/quarry} lease application of^{the Petitionerin the interest of justice}

¶20

1A 1 2024

¶21

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 pleased to suspend the order passed by Respondent No.1 vide Memo No.7142lM.l(2)12018, dt. 06.03.2024, pending disposat of the writ petition in the interest of justice

¶22

lA 2 2024

¶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 pleased to direct the Respondents not to grant any orders in favor Respondent No.S creating rights over the mining/quarry lease applied area of the writ petitioner pending disposal of the Writ petition in the interest of justice

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRt. cOURtDEVI KRTSHNATAH

¶25

Counsel for the Respondents: Gp FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

i ! I t iI I I I II t

I I t t ! I :

/' /

i')

THE HOT{'BLE^{SRI WSTICEC. V' BHASKAR REDDY} WRIT PETITION^{NO.25745 ot2024}

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

This Writ Petition,^{under Article 226 ofthe}

¶34

Constitution of India,^{is frled by the petitioner seekingthe}

¶35

following relief:

¶36

"..-.to issue a^{tuit, order or directionmore porticularlAone in the} nafire ol utit of^{MANDAMIJSchallenEng the action of the} Respondent^No.1 in^{passing the impugned,revision order uide} Memo No.7742/^{M.1(2)/2018,dt. 06/03/2024rejecting ttrc mining} lease applicatiorl bg^{dismissingthE reuision applicationfiledbg the} uit^petitioner is^{improper,unreasoned,arbitrary, illegaland} unartstitutional^{and conseEtentlgsel aside the Memo No 7 142/ M} I(2)/2018 itt.O6/^{03/ 2024 issued. bg theRespondentNo l withthe} direction to constder^{th.e grantof mining/qrarry lease applicotion} of the Petitioner^{in tLeinterestof justice and magpass" "}

¶37

2 It is stated that the^{petitioner filed an application for} grant of mining lease^{on13.03'2008 for quartz and} Feldspar over an^{extent of Ac'95-O0guntas, in Sy'Nos' 196'} tgg, 2O8, 2Og,^{2lO, 2L9, 22O and 221 situated at} Andugula village,^{Madgul Mandal, Ranga ReddyDistrict'} As per the^{provisionsof Minor Minerals Concessions Rules'} 1966, the Tahsildar^{has to issueno objection certihcateto} ascertain availability of^{land for mining lease' Though the} application has been^{submitted after obtaining necessary} pergrigsions, the same^{was rejectedbythe Director of}

¶38

¶39

Mines and Geolory urde proceedings No.10077/R2_3/2013, dated 07.07.2018 and questioning the said rejection order, the petitioner frled W.p.No .3229 of 2023. This Court, by an order, dal.ed 15.06.2023 disposed of W.p.No.3229 of 2023 by setting aside the impugned revision order, dated 21.12.2022 and directed respondent No.l_The State of Telangana, represented by its principal Secretary_Cum_ Revision Authorit5z to reconsider t]le application of the petitioner and pass appropriate orJ.." thereon within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the said order. The present writ petition has been filed on the ground that the respondents has passed the impugned orders without providing reasonable opportunity to submit the objections and the said action amounts to violation of principles of natura_l justice.

¶40

Sri V<:nkat Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that the respondents have passed the impugned order without taking into consideration of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.3229 of 2023 and without affording an opportunity

of hearing to^{the petitionerwhich amountsto gross} violation of principles of natural^justice.

¶45

¶46

A reading of the impugned^{order passedby} respondent No. 1^{showsthat respondentNo.l has issued} show cause notice to^{the petitioner, vide SCN.No.10O77/} R2-3/2013, dated 14.04.2017.It^{is stated in the order that} as per the records, the^{show cause notice was neither} returned by postal department^{nor arly reply was received} from the applicant. FIrther,^{as per the amendmentsmade} to the rules by the^{Government urde G-O.Ms.No'26,dated} 3I.O3.2O22 all^{pending applicationsbecomes ineligible'} While recording the said^{frnding,it is categorically stated} that show-cause notice,^{dated 14'04.2017 h.as not been} returned by the^{postal department-Having foundthat} there was no acknowledgment^{ofservice ofnotice,} respondent No.l ought^{to have issuedthe freshshow-} cause notice to the^{petitioner and providedan opportunity} of personal hearing as^{directed by thisCourt in} W.P.No.3229 of 2023.^{Since, respondentNo'l has passed} the impugned orders^{withoutgiving reasonableopportunity} the impugned order is^{liable to be set aside on the sole}

¶47

\ I

¶48

¶49

ground of violation of principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and respondent No.l is directed to issue fresh show cause notice to the petitioner and after affording him an opportunity of personal hearing, pass appropriate orders strictly in compliance with the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.3229 of 2023 within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of copy of this order.

¶50

a',,

¶51

With the above observations, tl.is writ petition is / disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶52

6 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if aly,

¶53

¶54

pending shall stand closed.

¶55

SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL ASSISTANTI REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// .1 SECTI6N OFFICER^t

¶56

To,

¶57

The Principal Secretary-Cum- Revision Authority, (Mines aGeology) lndustries and Commerce (Mines-l) Department, Govemment of Tetanoana, 8th floor, BRKR Bhawan, Tank Bund, Secretariat, The State ofTelangana Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶58

The Director of Mines and Geology, Govemment of Telangana, 2nd Floor, My Homes Sarovar Complex, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶59

The Dy. Director of ltllines and Geology, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶60

The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶61

.One CC to SRI GOURIDEV| KRTSHNATAH Advocate tOpUCI

¶62

Two CCs to GP FOR IVTNES AND GEOLOGy,High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶63

Two CD Copies

¶64

One Spare Copy

HIGH COURT

DATED:19 tO9t2O24

ORDER

WP.No.2574S of 2024

?. - r^r/t
i /t ,)'J
()
B 0 2 ,jr\li 2[25 I
j
t/
^+
--aso ',-r-rl)

¶71

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶72

rrL?? ,^-1, 07 5\tt^t

Sri S. Govardhan Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri S. Govardhan Reddy 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.D.Chudamma , Chudamani W/o Late D.Venkateswarlu Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

T. Muralidhar Rao, Vs State of Telangana

Challa Ramesh, Vs The Union of India

Gonthi Gopal Reddy Gonthi Gopi Vs State of Telangana

Mohd. Ali and 4 Ors. Vs Prl. Secy., Rev. Dept. and 2 Ors.

Gowtham Poluri Vs Union of India