Telangana High Court
WP/29127/2009 of Shaik Meera Mohiddin Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of 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.29127 OF 2009 Between: Shaik Meera Mohiddin, S/o.Venkatanarayana ..... PETITIONER AND
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.29127 OF 2009
Between:
Shaik Meera Mohiddin, S/o.Venkatanarayana
..... PETITIONERANDThe Government of Andhra Pradesh,Department of Mines and Geology,Represented by its Deputy Director,Kakinada, East Godavari District and another....RESPONDENTS
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA
WRIT PETITION No.29127 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.37 at Ankampalem Vilage,Atreyapuram Mandal, East Godavari District, despite holding the leasetill 31.03.2011 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of principles of naturaljustice against the procedure contemplated under the Andhra PradeshMinor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 and violative of theFundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19 of theConstitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents not tointerfere with petitioner’s right to conduct quarry operations and passsuch 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 noorder as to costs.
___________________P.S. NARAYANA, J
December 31, 2009Note: Issue wire at Party’s cost.B/O.MD