WP/34780/2011 of Akula Adinarayana, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh on 30 December 2011

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia, seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of therespondents in demanding the lease amount for full one year for the 2[nd] year lease without adjusting the excess amount paid for a period of30 days in the first year lease commencing from 01-05-2010 to 31-03-2011 for the Reach No.14, Korumilli Village, KapileswrapuramMandal, East Godavari District of GLB, Km 32.600 to 33.600 Ramppoint at K.32,700 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the GovernmentMemo No.4919/SPIU & sand/2008-2, dated 13-06-2008, and violativeof the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966.

2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of this writ petition may be stated as follows:

In pursuance of the auction notification, dated 04-04-2010,issued by the 5[th] respondent, for leasing out the right of quarrying forordinary sand in Godavari River of Reach No.14, Korumilli Village ofKapileswarapuram Mandal, East Godavari District, the petitionerparticipated in the auction and stood as highest bidder. The minimumbid amount for the period from 01-05-2010 to 31-03-2011 isRs.1,23,45,504/-. He became the highest bidder by quoting an amountof Rs.1,24,00,000/- (for 12 months). The 3[rd] respondent - the DistrictCollector accorded confirmation of lease vide proceedings, dated 23-04-2010, directing the petitioner to execute the lease deed. Accordingly, the petitioner paid the required amount and executed thelease deed and the work order was issued vide proceedings, dated 29-04-2010 permitting the petitioner to conduct sand quarryingoperations for a period of two years w.e.f. 01-05-2010 to 31-03-2012. The first year lease period started from 01-05-2010 and ends by 31-03-2011 i.e. for 11 months and the second year starts from 01-04-2011 and ends by 31-03-2012.

The Government of A.P. issued Memo No.4919/SPIU & Sand/2008-2, dated 13-06-2008, clarifying that if the lease holder hasindicated the bid amount for 12 months, the same shall be take intoconsideration and proportionate amount shall be collected, if theperiod is less than 12 months and balance amount if any at credit ofthe lessee, it shall be adjusted in the second year amount. As perRule 9-E of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, if thelease deed is executed for less than 12 months the bid amount has tobe collected in proportionate to the period left and not for full one year. At the time of entering into the lease agreement for the first year, thepetitioner paid the lease amount for 12 months, but the lease periodwas only 11 months i.e. from 01-05-2010 to 31-03-2011. Thepetitioner is under the impression that the excess amount paid for 30days would be adjusted in the second year lease amount. The Government permitted the petitioner to pay the second year leaseamount in equal quarterly installments. The petitioner had alreadypaid three installments and the last quarter amount is due. He maderepresentations to the 2[nd] respondent stating that he has paid excess lease amount for 30days and adjust the same in the last quarter amount to be paid by himfor the second year lease amount, and give necessary instructions tothe 5[th] respondent to give permission to conduct the quarryingoperations by paying the last installment.

The 2[nd] respondent is not taking any action on therepresentations made by the petitioner and not giving any permissionto conduct the quarrying operation by collecting the last quarteramount by adjusting the excess amount for a period of 30 days alreadypaid by the petitioner. Hence, this Writ Petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitionerpaid excess amount for a period of 30 days in the first lease agreementand that amount has to be taken into consideration in the second leaseperiod and therefore, he prays to issue a direction to the respondentsto collect the 4[th] installment amount from the petitioner by adjusting theexcess amount already paid by the petitioner.

4. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader forMines & Geology, appearing for the respondents, stated that paymentof the lease amount should be in accordance with the leaseagreement, Rules and also Memo, dated 13-06-2008.

5. The case of the petitioner is that in pursuance of theagreement, dated 01-05-2010, the respondents are demanding thelease amount for the entire one year of the second year lease withoutadjusting the excess amount paid for a period of 30 days in the firstyear lease. As per the Memo No. 4919/SPIU & sand/2008-2, dated 13-06-2008, if the bid period is for 12 months, the entire amount shallbe collected and the proportionate amount shall be collected for theperiod less than 12 months and the balance amount, if any, it shall beadjusted for the second year lease period. Therefore, appropriatedecision has to be taken by the respondents in accordance with thememo issued by the Government.

6. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing therespondents to take appropriate decision in accordance with law,particularly, with reference to the Memo No.4919/SPIU & Sand/2008-2,dated 13-06-2008, issued by the Government of A.P., and adjust theexcess amount paid by the petitioner and receive the balance amountfrom him. No costs.

December 30, 2011.KTL

____________

K.C. BHANU, J