HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 23083 of 2010 DATED 20TH SEPTEMBER, 2010. BETWEEN M.Subba Rao and anr …..Petitioners and The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. By its Secretary, Industries & Commerce Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and, ors …..Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 23083 of 2010 ORDER: This Writ Petition is ﬁled seeking a Mandamus to declare action of the respondents 2 to 5 in not taking action against respondent No.6 in laying of new ramp unauthorisedly through the patta lands of the petitioners in an extent of Acs.1.57 in Sy.Nos. 45/4,45/5 and 45 towards Gopalapuram--Siddantham, contrary to Notiﬁcation dated 02.05.2010 and further in proceeding to grant permission by fourth respondent for formation of new ramp towards Gopalapuram--Siddantham through the patta lands of the petitioners without considering their objections dated 18.08.2010 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and violative of A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 5 and Sri CVR.Rudraprasad, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.6. It appears, notiﬁcation issued on 02.05.2010 contemplates ramp as under: “SCHEDULE:-- RAMP POINT: Vasista Left Bank Km.30,000 to Km 47,600 Ramp path way starting From NH Road point at Km.32,900 to Km.33,600 Of V.L.B.” The grievance of the petitioner is that instead of constructing ramp therein, respondents have constructed ramp unauthorisedly through petitioners’ patta lands in Sy.Nos. 45/4,45/5 and 45 towards Gopalapuram-- Siddantham, contrary to notiﬁcation dated 02.05.2010. In this regard, Assistant Executive Engineer, Irrigation/River Conservative Oﬃcer issued proceedings stating that the ramp is not constructed as per the notiﬁcation and therefore action may be initiated against sixth respondent. The petitioners purported to have ﬁled objections on 18.08.2010 and the same are pending consideration with third respondent as of today. Learned Counsel for the sixth respondent stated that sixth respondent has also ﬁled representation for the purpose of laying down proper ramp. Under these facts and circumstances of the case, respondents 1 to 5 are directed to consider the objections purported to have been ﬁled by the petitioners on 18.08.2010 and also representation ﬁled by the sixth respondent under Rule 9(n) of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, and, pass appropriate orders as per law. However, till such time, sixth respondent is directed not to use ramp purported to have been constructed in the patta lands of the petitioners in Sy.Nos. 45/4,45/5 and 45 towards Gopalapuram--Siddantham. Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ----------------------------------- JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 20T H SEPTEMBER, 2010. Msnr.