IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21257 of 2000 Between: Mahanan Prakash, S/o. Nagnath, R/o. Birkur, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhodan, Nizamabad District. 2 The Joint Collector, Nizambad. (No relief is sought against R-2 to R-4 they are only proper parties. 3 The Principal Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh & Commissioner for Industrial Promotion, Industries and Commerce (Mines-1) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. (No relief is sought against R-2 to R-4 they are only proper parties. 4 The Secretary to Govenment of Andhra Pradesh, Panchayat Raj and Rural Department (Pts.III) Department,Secretariat, Hyderabad. (No relief is sought against R-2 to R-4 they are only proper parties. 5 The Collector (Panchayath Department), Nizamabad. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR. C.SREENIVAS Counsel for Respondents 1 and 2: AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an order, direction or writ one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.1 in demanding the 75% of knock down balance amount Rs.7,95,501/- to sell the sand as illegal, void, arbitrary and contrary to the rules laid down in G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 29-2-2000 PR & RD (Pts.III) Department read with G.O.Ms.No.417 dated 1-12-1998 Industries and Commerce (Mines-I) Department and against the Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 and contrary to the provisions of articles 14, 19, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and against the principles of natural justice and direct respondent No.1 to allow the petitioner to sell the sand pertaining to Manjeera Nadi of Kistapur Village, Birkur Mandal, Nizamabad District, and direct respondent No.1 to collect the balance bid amount in accordance with Rule 9-P of Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1966, and declare the action of 5th respondent in calling for tenders without way to the Manjira Nadi at Kistapoor Village, as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of Articles 14, 21 and direct the 5th respondent to provide way to the Manjira Nadi enabling the petitioner to lift the sand.” At the hearing, Sri C.Sreenivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for consideration. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 25th July, 2008 vrn