THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.14786 of 2009 Between: Sakireddy Nagaveni and others. .. Petitioners And The Director of Mines and Geology, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.14786 of 2009 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel. This Court ordered notice before admission on 23.07.2009 and made the following order: “Learned Government Pleader for Revenue is directed to get instructions with regard to the status of sending reports on the applications of the petitioners for grant of quarrying lease, forthwith. Post after two weeks. Till then, respondent No.2 is directed not to take any action pursuant to the show-cause notice dated 16.05.2009 and shall maintain status quo in that regard.” The writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in not sending the report to the 2nd and 3rd respondents, as illegal and arbitrary, and for consequential direction to the respondents not to reject the applications of the petitioners for grant of lease for quarrying road metal in Sy.No.94 to an extent of 7.6 hectares each in Marriveedu Village, Yeleswaram Mandal of East Godavari District. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the petitioners filed applications before the 3rd respondent- Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, for grant of lease for quarrying road metal in Sy.No.94, to an extent of 7.6 hectares each, situated at Marriveedu Village, Yeleswaram Mandal of East Godavari District, and while filing the said applications, they paid the consent fee by way of challans. It is further stated that the said applications were received by the 3rd respondent and thereafter the petitioners approached the 2nd and 3rd respondents many times to grant them lease for quarrying road metal in Sy.No.94 as aforesaid. It is also further stated that the 3rd respondent forwarded one set of applications to the 4th respondent- Tahsildar, Yeleswaram Mandal, East Godavari District, vide letters dated 01.10.2007, with a request to issue report regarding classification and availability of the land applied for quarrying lease by the petitioners and that the 4th respondent received those applications long back i.e. in the year 2007, but he did not send the said report to the 2nd and 3rd respondents so far. Further, it is stated that the 1st respondent- Director of Mines & Geology, Hyderabad, vide Circular Memo No.28668/P1/2005 dated 07.03.2006, had instructed all the Assistant Directors of Mines and Geology to submit rejection proposals on the quarrying lease applications for which the NOC reports are not received within 60 days from the Tahsildar concerned on the ground that the Revenue Department is not inclined to issue No Objection Certificate, and as per the said directions of the 1st respondent, the 3rd respondent recommended for rejection of the applications of the petitioners. It is also further stated that, basing on the above said facts, the 2nd respondent- Deputy Director of Mines & Geology, Kakinada, had issued show-cause notices to the petitioners for rejection of their applications for issuance of quarrying lease. It is also stated that the petitioners approached the 4th respondent on several occasions to send the report which was asked for by the 3rd respondent, but the 4th respondent is not sending the same, and because of the said attitude of the 4th respondent, the 2nd respondent issued show-cause notices to the petitioners for cancellation of the applications submitted by them. Further, it is stated that immediately, after receiving the said show-cause notices, the petitioners approached the District Collector to direct the 4th respondent to send the said report to the 3rd respondent and they also filed explanations to the show-cause notices issued by the 2nd respondent requesting him not to cancel their applications on that ground. The specific stand taken by the petitioners is that due to the negligence on the part of the 4th respondent in not sending the report, they shall not be penalized. In the light of the facts and circumstances, the 4th respondent- Tahsildar, Yeleswaram Mandal, East Godavari District, is hereby directed to forward the reports to the 3rd respondent- Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and in the light of the same, let the 3rd respondent dispose of the applications of the petitioners, in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks thereafter. It is needless to say that, in the light of these directions, the show-cause notices issued by the 2nd respondent to the petitioners become ineffective. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the above directions. No order as to costs. ___________________ JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA 6th August, 2009 IBL