IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15949 of 2010 Between: G. Prasada Rao ... PETITIONER a n d The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Industries and Commerce (SPIU & SAND), Secretariat, Hyderabad rep. by its Secretary and others … RESPONDENTS ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by G. Prasad Rao represented by GPA holder L. Parameshwar Reddy assailing the inaction of the first respondent on the revision preferred by him against the orders passed by the Collector, SPSR Nellore district – second respondent. 2. The Assistant Director, Mines and Geology Department, SPSR, Nellore – third respondent issued auction notification No.864/Q/2008-11 dated 18-04-2009 for grant of leasehold rights to quarry sand for the reaches notified therein. The upset price for the said reach was fixed at Rs.6,00,000/- for a period of one year. The petitioner participated in the auction held on 18-05-2009 and bid came to be knocked down in his favour having offered highest bid amount of Rs.16,00,000/-. The petitioner paid 25% of the total amount offered by him. The Collector, SPSR Nellore district – second respondent confirmed the auction on 22-11-2009 and there upon the third respondent directed the petitioner to pay the balance amount within a period of 7 days i.e., on or before 28-11-2009. The respondents earlier informed the petitioner and other bidders regarding their inability to confirm the auction because of the order dated 13-05-2009 passed in W.P.No.10073/2009. Subsequently, the second respondent passed orders on 29-01-2010 forfeiting the earnest money deposited by the petitioner and 25% of the bid amount. The petitioner filed revision before the first respondent assailing the order passed by the District Collector, SPSR Nellore district – second respondent. There being no action on the revision, the petitioner approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology takes notice on behalf of the respondents. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 5. The limited grievance of the petitioner is that the first respondent is not acting on the revision filed by him. Therefore, necessary direction is required to be given to the first respondent to dispose of the revision filed by the petitioner. 6. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the revision filed assailing the order passed by the second respondent and pass appropriate orders within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J July 07, 2010. PN THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15949 of 2010 July 07, 2010