IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.12421 of 2010 BETWEEN M/s. Sri Venkateshwara Stone and Metal Suppliers, Karimnagar District. ... PETITIONER AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Industries (Mines) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 8 others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. V. RAVI KIRAN RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE GP FOR HOME GP FOR REVENUE MR. Y. RAMA RAO The Court made the following order: ORDER: Petitioner is a lessee under a quarry lease for stone metal in Sy.No.493 admeasuring 2.80 hectares situated at Kannala Village, Kamanpur Mandal, Karimnagar District. The present writ petition is filed complaining inaction by the official respondents in not taking any action against the respondents 8 and 9, who are allegedly occupying part of the leased area of the petitioner. 2. Petitioner relies upon the proceedings of the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Warangal dated 30.04.2010 issued against respondents 8 and 9, on finding that they are illegally occupying the quarry and conducting quarry operations in the petitioner’s area, asking them to vacate the quarry lease area held by the petitioner failing which further action will be taken. The writ petition came to be filed on the ground that no action is being taken in furtherance of the said proceedings. 3. While this Court admitted the writ petition on 21.07.2010 and directed the respondents to file counter, the official respondent i.e. the second respondent has now filed a counter affidavit specifically stating in para 3 that in pursuance of the aforesaid order dated 30.04.2010 the eighth respondent has vacated the leased area of the petitioner and the ninth respondent, who was also found occupying the part of the leased area of the petitioner, has been evicted with the assistance of police on 09.08.2010. The Deputy Director’s office has thereafter conducted survey and inspection on 09.08.2010 and 11.08.2010 fixing the boundaries to the extent of 2.80 hectares of leased area of the petitioner. 4. In view of the above, since the petitioner is in enjoyment of the leased area, no further cause survives for consideration in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J November 11, 2011 DSK