HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No.9882 of 2011 ORDER: The Petitioner-Company seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of 2nd respondent-Assistant Director of Mines and Geology in not forwarding the application of petitioner for grant of quarry lease in respect of land covered by Sy.No.66, situated in Polavaram Village of Sankhavaram Mandal, East Godavari District along with no objection certificate sent by the 4th respondent, as illegal and arbitrary. Petitioner herein, which is a Company registered under the Companies Act, has submitted application in Form-P on 16.4.2010, for grant of quarry lease over an extent of 6.00 Hectares of land in Sy.No.66 of Polavaram Village of Sankhavaram Mandal, East Godavari District for a period of twenty years. On the application submitted by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent-Assistant Director of Mines and Geology has addressed letters dated 24.11.2010 and 25.11.2010, to the 4th respondent-Tahsildar, for issuance of no objection certificate. It is the case of the petitioner that on the letter addressed by the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, the 4th respondent has sent no objection certificate, but in spite of the same, the 2nd respondent is not forwarding the petitioner’s application to the 1st respondent-Director of Mines and Geology, to consider the same for grant of quarry lease. For expeditious disposal of applications for quarry lease, the Government has issued guidelines in G.O.Ms.No.181, dated 28.05.1998. As per the guidelines notified by the Government, when communication is sent by the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, the Tahsildar has to send necessary documents directly to the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology by addressing a copy to the District Collector concerned. It is always open to the District Collector to send his remarks, if he is in disagreement with the recommendations sent by the Tahsildar, but at this stage, the respondents cannot withhold the proceedings, without sending the same to the competent authority. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the application of the petitioner has been considered by the 4th respondent, who has sent his report to the 2nd respondent. However, the 2nd respondent has not forwarded the same to the 1st respondent. Learned counsel submits that the 2nd respondent be directed to send the report to the 1st respondent expeditiously. After hearing the counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to forward the application of the petitioner along with the report of the 4th respondent to the 1st respondent. It is also made clear that if the 3rd respondent-District Collector is not in agreement with the recommendation of the 4th respondent, it would be open to him to send his own remarks/recommendation to the concerned authority i.e., the Director of Mines and Geology. On receipt of necessary communication from the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent shall consider the application of the petitioner on its own merits and take appropriate decision. Further, the 2nd respondent is directed to send his remarks/recommendation to the 1st respondent within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _____________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA,J Date: 13th April, 2011 Note: Furnish c.c. in four days. B/o pnb