THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.2446 of 2010 Dated 24th August, 2010 Between: Kalvakota Ranga Rao Deshpandya Memorial Trust and another. …Petitioners And The Director of Mines & Geology, Government of Andhra Pradesh and others. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri C. Ramesh Sagar Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5: Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology Counsel for respondent Nos.6 to 9: None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition itself is taken for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5. Petitioner No.1 is a Trust and petitioner No.2 is a temple. They have felt aggrieved by the proposed action of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in considering grant of quarry lease for granite in favour of respondent No.7. The grievance of the petitioners is that Sri Laxmi Narasimha Swamy temple, which is a registered religious institution under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short ‘the Act’) is situated in close proximity to survey No.9 of Narsilapalli Village of Gangadhara Mandal, Karimnagar District and that grant of quarry lease may affect the temple, pushkarini and other structures relating thereto. The Assistant Director, Mines and Geology, Karimnagar, filed a counter-affidavit, wherein it is inter alia stated that as many as seven persons have applied for grant of mining lease for different extents of land in the abovementioned survey number and that when an objection was raised by the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Karimnagar, vide his letter dated 07.02.2010 against the proposed grant of the quarry lease, respondent No.2 has visited the area and has found that the temple is located on south side at a distance of 400 to 500 metres from the proposed quarry area. He has also stated that the proposed areas are falling on the northern flank of hillock which are on the other side of the temple and that even if a person stands facing the temple, the same is not visible from the proposed area. He has also stated that a mining lease was earlier granted in favour of M/s. Vajra Granites and that after having worked for two or three years, the quarry was abandoned by the licencee. He has further stated that the colour granite blocks are available in the quarry and that it is possible to extract the granite systematically and scientifically with the help of sophisticated machinery like wire saw and tam rock without causing any damage to the temple, pushkarini, fort and also agricultural lands. Respondent No.2 has also averred that the surveyor, by name, Sri Ch. Sarangapani has surveyed and demarcated the area on ground on 08.02.2010 and that he has reported that after leaving a comfortably safe distance from the temple, the quarry can be worked out over an extent of 9.00 hectares and 3.00 hectares. Respondent No.2 has referred to Rule 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, under which no quarry lease shall be granted in respect of the areas covering any tank, river bed, irrigation or drainage channel and of lands under the control of the public works department, municipality, local authority except after consultation with the Division or the River Conservator or the Commissioner of Municipality or the Block Development Officer of the Panchayat Samiti or the concerned Executive Officer appointed under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayats Act, 1964, as the case may be and that therefore, there is no requirement for obtaining any sanction from the Principal Secretary of Endowments Department as averred by the petitioners. At the hearing, Sri C. Ramesh Sagar, learned counsel for the petitioners, has fairly conceded that there is no statutory prohibition for granting of mining lease over the area which is situated near religious institutions. He has, however, stated that as the temple in question is likely to be affected by the proposed lease, the interests of the petitioners are required to be safeguarded. It is no doubt true that there is no statutory provision which prescribed minimum distance between the religious institutions and quarry area. However, it is incumbent upon the mining department to ensure that the quarry operations would not affect the religious institutions and defile their sanctity. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall, therefore, bestow their attention to the concerns expressed by the petitioners and shall see that under no circumstances, the structures of the temple, pushkarini and fort etc., are affected by the proposed quarry operations. As respondent No.2 has categorically stated that there is a distance of about 400 to 500 meters between the temple and the other structures referred to above and the proposed quarry area, they shall make sure that the said minimum distance is maintained and under no circumstances, the lessee shall be permitted to enter the safe distance of a minimum of 400 meters from these structures while working the quarry. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, interim order dated 08.02.2010 in W.P.M.P.No.3256 of 2010 is vacated and W.P.M.P.Nos.3253, 3256 of 2010 and W.V.M.P.Nos.1572 and 3134 of 2010 are disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 24th August, 2010 GHN