IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 14458 of 2001 Between: Sri Penmatsa Surya Bhagavan Raju, S/o Hemadri Raju, Hindu, R/o D.No. 55-14-4/1, A.P.S.E.B.Colony, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam-13. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Duputy Director of Mines and Geology, Visakhapatnam. 2 The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Vizianagaram. 3 Sri P.Srinivasa Babu, S/o Venkateswara Rao, Hindu, Door No.217/4, HIG, MVP Colony, Visakhpatnam. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Order of the First Respondent in his Proceeding No.1902/Q2/2001, dated 14.05.2001, granting the mining lease for his land illegally in favour of the Third Respondent to an extent of 1-51 Hectares in Survey No.32/6 of Kavulavada Village, Bhogapuram Mandal, Vizinagaram District, for a period of 10 years for operation of the mining lease of Granite metal, which was obtained by the Third Respondent, by misrepresentation and suppression of the material facts and without having right, title, possession or enjoyment of the said land as illegal, arbitrary, capricious, unjust and violative of principles of natural justice, and also without jurisdiction and consequently to set aside the said impugned Order dated 14.05.2001, and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 not to execute any mining deed in fevour of the Third Respondent pursuant to the impugned order dated 14.05.2001 of the First Respondent or to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.N.(P).ANJANA DEVI, SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KKG} HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.14458 of 2001 O R D E R: The petitioner claims that he is owner of land in Sy.No.32/6 in Kavulavada village, Bhogapuram Mandal, Vizianagaram District, admeasuring Ac.4.96 cents having purchased the same under possessory registered agreement, dated 02-04-2001. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent has been granted a mining lease in the aforesaid survey number to the extent of Ac.1.51 hectors and according to the petitioner, he being the owner has a preferential right. The said grant of lease in favour of 3rd respondent under the proceedings No.1902/Q2/2001, dated 14-05-2001, of the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Visakhapatnam, is challenged in this writ petition. 3. While issuing notice for admission, by order dated 17-07-2001, this Court directed the respondents to maintain status quo with regard to the mining operations in the aforesaid land to the extent of Ac.1.51 hectors. The stay order continues to be in force even now. 4. The respondents 1 and 2 have filed a counter affidavit specifically mentioning that in view of the pendency of this writ petition and the orders of status quo referred to above, no lease deed is executed in favour of 3rd respondent. It is also mentioned in the counter-affidavit that the 3rd respondent was an existing lessee but his lease was cancelled for non-payment of advance dead rent for the year 2000-01 and under the impugned order, dated 14-05- 2001, he has been granted a fresh lease. It is further averred in the counter affidavit that the petitioner also had made application for grant of lease (to the extent of land claimed by him) on 13-07-2001, which, however, was rejected by the proceedings of the Deputy Director, dated 02-01-2002 in view of the pendency of the present writ petition. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology. 6. The petitioner, prima facie, appears to be owner of the entire extent of Ac.4.96 cents under the registered document referred to above and the lease granted in favour of the 3rd respondent is apparently without notice to the petitioner. Further, the rejection of the petitioner’s application on the ground of pendency of this writ petition appears to be wholly unintelligible. However, in view of the fact that the status quo is operating from 17-07-2001, and that no lease deed is executed in favour of the 3rd respondent, I deem it appropriate to relegate the petitioner with the remedy of appeal as mentioned by the respondents in para-10 of their counter-affidavit and on such appeal being filed, the appellate authority shall deal with the matter afresh in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders. 7. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the following directions: 1. That the petitioner shall be at liberty to prefer an appeal under Rule 35 of the A.P. Mineral Concession Rules 1960 before the Director of Mines and Geology against the impugned order herein, within a period of four weeks from today. 2. That the status quo as ordered by this Court on 17-07-2001 shall continue pending disposal of the appeal before the Director. 3. That the appellate authority shall hear all the parties after giving notices and opportunity and shall dispose of the appeal, within two months of the date of filing of the appeal. 4. That the petitioner is also at liberty to file any representation or appeal to the extent of rejection of his application on the ground of pendency of the present writ petition. The parties are at liberty to raise all their contentions as they are advised before the appellate authority, which shall dispose of the appeal by reasoned order. If no such appeal is preferred by the petitioner, the order of status quo shall cease to operate after four weeks from today. 8. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. ____________________ 12th December 2008 Note Furnish C.C. in a week. B/o. kvr