Telangana High Court
WP/29126/2009 of Ch. Tammayya Naidu Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh on 31 December 2009
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.29126 OF 2009 Between: Ch. Tammayya Naidu, S/o.Brahmanandam ..... PETITIONER AND The
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND NINE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA
WRIT PETITION No.29126 OF 2009
Between:
Ch. Tammayya Naidu, S/o.Brahmanandam
..... PETITIONER
AND
The Government of Andhra Pradesh,Department of Mines and Geology,Represented by its District Collector and Confirming Authority,Kakinada, East Godavari District and another
....RESPONDENTS
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA
WRIT PETITION No.29126 OF 2009
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The matter is coming up for admission.
2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geologytakes notice on behalf of respondents.
3. This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus declaring action ofrespondent No.2 in interfering with petitioner’s right to conduct quarryoperations in respect of Reach No.42 situated at Gopalapuram, despiteholding the lease till 31.03.2010 as arbitrary, illegal and violative ofprinciples of natural justice against the procedure contemplated underthe Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 andviolative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and19 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct therespondents not to interfere with petitioner’s right to conduct quarryoperations and pass such other suitable orders.
4. Several facts had been narrated in the affidavit filed in support ofthe writ petition.
5. In the show-cause notice issued, it is stated that the explanationshould reach the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology,Rajahmundry within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice,failing which further necessary action will be initiated as per rulestreating that they do not possess any explanation to offer.
6. In the light of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of theconsidered opinion that the writ petition be disposed of givingopportunity to the petitioner to file explanation forthwith and let therespondents consider the same in accordance with law, within a periodof two weeks and pass appropriate orders. Till then the petitioner bepermitted to carry on the operations.
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
December 31, 2009Note: Issue wire at Party’s cost.B/O.MD
___________________
P.S. NARAYANA, J