THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24221 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the owner of Acs.0.20 guntas of land in survey No.63 of Ogipur Village, Tandur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The ﬁfth respondent is said to have purchased part of land in survey No.63 from the petitioner and obtained a mining lease to quarry building stone and road metal. The grievance of the petitioner is that the ﬁfth respondent is carrying on mining operations in the land owned by himself and though several complaints have been made to the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, the third respondent herein, and the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, the fourth respondent herein, no action has been taken thereon. He seeks directions to respondents 3 and 4 to prevent the ﬁfth respondent from carrying on mining operations in his patta land. It is also stated that the ﬁfth respondent is making applications for grant of leases over the other patta lands of the petitioner. On behalf of respondents 1 to 4, a counter- aﬃdavit is ﬁled denying the allegations of the petitioner. Objections were also raised as to the maintainability of the writ petition. Heard Smt.N.Shoba, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology. There appears to be some boundary dispute between the petitioner on the one hand, and the ﬁfth respondent on the other. It is stated that the ﬁfth respondent purchased the land from the petitioner and thereafter, obtained licence under the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 (for short ‘the Rules’). The ﬁfth respondent on the other hand, pleads that it is the petitioner who purchased the land in survey No.63 from him. Be that as it may, if there exists any overlapping of the claims or if the ﬁfth respondent is carrying any mining operations over the land owned and possessed by the petitioner, the only remedy open to him is to ﬁle a suit for injunction. In such a suit, it would be possible for the parties concerned to adduce evidence not only as regards the respective extents held by them but also about the nature of encroachments or violations by the other party. Secondly, if any application is made by any third party for grant of lease over the land of the petitioner, he can certainly raise objection and pursue his remedy under the Rules. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue his remedy in a Civil Court. It shall be open to him to place such material as is in his possession before the Civil Court, including the pleadings in this writ petition. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:04.11.2008. kdl