Petitioner sought direction to dispose of its pending revision application on quarry lease and unblock quarry ID. Court directed Respondent No.1 to dispose of the revision by a set date; respondents undertook not to initiate proceedings pending revision.
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.
[3405 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA
WRIT PETITION NO: 34783 0F 2024
Between:
M/s Buildmate lvletal Industries, Rep. by its proprietor, Smt. Swapna, Wo M. Venkata PrasaC, 1,,1. Venketa Das, ag3 42,;eirs, ,Rl/o.plct Uc.?-t-bd, Fiai No.G9, Road No.5F, Panchavati Colony, Ir/anikonda, Hyderabad
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India 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 MANDAMUS, the action of the Respondent No.1 in not disposing the Revision Application dt.12-11-2024 filed by the writ petitioner and not issuing the transit permits, blocking the quarry lease lD pending revision application is arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent authorities to unblock the ID of the writ Petitioner and to issue transit permits to carry out the quarry operations pending revision application before Respondent No.1 .
: I i
1
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
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 respondent No.4 to issue the transit permits to the petitioner to carry out the quarry operations, pendrng disposal of the writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. p.VlJAyA LAKSHMI counsel for the Respondents: sRr K.GourHAM REDDy, AGp FoR MrNES AND GEOLOGY
The Court made the fotlowing: ORDER
m
THE HON,BLE JUSTICEMOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA
WRIT PETITIONN o -347830F 2024
Srnr Ir V!ataLakshml, learrled courrsel lor'r}e petttioncr
Mr. K CautharnReddy.tlle lca-rncdAssistanl G'rvcrnmcntPlcade|torMr es and GeoloRy
ORDER
After hearinglearned counsel appearingfor the petitionerand the learnedAssistant Government Pleaderfor Minesand Geolory'it is undisputed thatthe petitioner's Revisionundcr Rule 35-A of The Telangana StateMinor Mineral Concession Rules' 1966is pending since12. I | .2024.
4.Thesubmissionmadeonbehatfoftherespondentsthatthe respondents willnot in iliate an5' proceedingspending Revision is taken on record
lnterim orders,if any, shalt s[and vacatcd 'I'he re shall be no
ordcr as to costs
KSHMIB u SD,.L.LA REGIS R ASSISTANT
/[RUECOPY'I SECTIONOFFICER
T
"''""'"-"Jffi":
; ip,i,u$:,**",..',,;"";**#l
e)SK.l$fiturui*"i:J3,&s.i='r33Jo'""hes'[a'ie'r
I
x/.\
I i l
HIGH COURT
DATED:1611212024
ORDER
WP.No.34783 of ZO24
.:1i'.'!,.-,.. ii4i=:-
//ia'
l'v'
I-t //-f--- 2t; itrI zt24
()
, .l'
\ ,-)
'./)- . , ,.
:l
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
1,)-r
:<i.li--*
I
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Respondent No.1 can be directed to dispose of the petitioner's pending Revision Application under Rule 35-A within a fixed time frame.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
M/s Buildmate Metal Industries, rep. by its proprietor Smt. Swapna
The State of Telangana, rep. by its Secretary, Industries and Commerce Dept.
The Director of Mines and Geology, Government of Telangana
The Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Nizamabad Region
The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Sangareddy
Moushumi Bhattacharya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
