THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.2598 of 2011 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for the respondents. This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the second respondent – Assistant Director of Mines and Geology & Member Convenor of District Level Sand Committee, West Godavari at Eluru, vide letter bearing No.1017/Q/2009, dated 04.02.2011, addressed by him to the petitioner, in refusing to issue waybills for transportation of sand in Reach No.10, V.R.B. from 45.400 to 51.000 kms. ramp point at 47/000 to 47/200 kms near Karugorumilli Village, Achanta Mandal, West Godavari District, as illegal and arbitrary. Petitioner is a lessee for quarrying sand in Reach No.10, V.R.B. from 45.400 to 51.000 kms ramp point at 47/000 to 47/200 kms near Karugorumilli Village, Achanta Mandal, West Godavari District, for a period of two (2) years and the lease is valid up to 31.03.2011. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though there is an existing valid lease, the respondents are not issuing waybills for transportation in terms of the lease agreement. When the petitioner applied for issuance of waybills, the second respondent addressed the impugned letter to him stating that he has used the poclain for lifting and loading of sand and the same is contrary to Rule 9-X(e) of the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, read with covenant 6(XXIII) read with Condition 8(IV) of the lease agreement, and that the proposals have been sent to the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Kakinada, with a request to determine the lease, as such, his application would not be considered. As of now, there is no order determining the lease. Although it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for the respondents that the proposals were sent by the second respondent to the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Kakinada, by letter, dated 28.01.2011, so far, no order determining the lease is passed. In the absence of passing any such order, merely on the ground that the proposals were sent to the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Kakinada, for determination of lease, the second respondent cannot refuse to issue waybills to the petitioner for transportation of sand in respect of the quarry lease in terms of the lease agreement. In that view of the matter, I deem it appropriate to direct the second respondent to issue waybills to the petitioner in terms of the lease agreement so long as the lease granted in his favour is in force. However, it is made clear that this order will not preclude the respondents to pass appropriate orders on the proposals sent by the second respondent for determination of lease. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 11th FEBRUARY, 2011. Note: issue operative portion by ‘wire’ at party’s costs. kvni