THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.14509 of 2010 Dated:25th June, 2010 Between: Karri Sreenivasa Reddy ... Petitioner a n d 1. The Superintendent of Police (Vigilance and Enforcement), East GodavariDistrict & Ors. … Respondents *** ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by Karri Sreenivasa Reddy with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with his right to repair the pathways, reconstruct the ramp, removing the stranded vehicles by using machinery from Ubalanka- Ravulapalem village and mandal, East Godavari District, despite having leasehold rights till 31.12.2012, as arbitrary and illegal. 2. The petitioner participated in the auction held for grant of leasehold rights to quarry sand from Godavari River of Package No.6, Uabalanka-Ravulapalem Village and Mandal, East Godavari District. He became the successful bidder having offered a sum of Rs.2,26,50,000/- for two years. Bid in his favour came to be confirmed by the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District-2nd respondent, on 28.05.2010. He executed the lease agreement on 28.05.2010 and thereupon, the 2nd respondent issued work order on the same day. The lease period is 2 years. While the petitioner was conducting quarry operations by engaging few hundred workers, it has become eminent for him to strengthen the ramp and pathways as they were washed away during the floods. Since the respondents started interfering with his activity of laying of the ramp and pathways, he approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. When the Writ Petition came up for admission, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology received notice on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 and 3. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly conceded that under Rule 9-X (e) of the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 (for short “the Rules”), the lessees shall not use poclainers or any other machinery for the purpose of digging/loading of sand in view of the restriction placed under the provisions of the Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 regarding the depth to which sand is permitted to be extracted. The learned counsel, however, submitted that apprehending that the petitioner may use heavy machinery for excavation of sand, the Tahsildar, Ravulapalem Mandal, East Godavari District-4th respondent is not permitting him to use the machinery required for the purpose of maintenance of ramps and removal of the failed vehicles in course of transportation of sand. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology submitted that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court in W.P.Nos.12424 of 2010 and batch. It is held in the above-referred judgment as follows: “In my opinion while the lessees are strictly prohibited from using heavy machinery such as poclainers for excavating sand, at the same time, they shall be permitted to use the machinery required for strengthening of the ramps and also to attend to the vehicles which are either stuck or have failed in the course of transportation of sand either in the riverbed or otherwise. In order to ensure that the machinery is not misused for the purpose of excavation of sand, the petitioners shall intimate in writing to the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology concerned giving the details of the work which is required to be attended to and the machinery which is proposed to be used. It is only after giving such intimation that the petitioners can deploy the machinery required only for the purpose of maintenance of ramps and attending to the vehicles which have failed or got stuck. The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology or any other competent authority shall be at liberty to depute any of this subordinates to oversee the proposed work of the lessees. It is made clear that if the lessees use the machinery for the purpose of excavation of sand, the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology/the competent authority is entitled to take action according to law.” 6. Following the decision of this Court in the above writ petition, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date: 25th June, 2010. cs THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Writ Petition No.14509 of 2010 Date:25th June, 2010