HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 18149 OF 2011 . DATED 30th June, 2011 BETWEEN Puchakayala Ankamma Rao …Petitioner And The State of AP, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Industries and Commerce Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and ors. ….Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 18149 of 2011 ORDER: Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleaders for Industries & Commerce, Revenue, Mines & Geology and Sri P.Kamalar, learned Counsel appearing for the eight respondent. Perused the case file. The second respondent, after obtaining necessary requisite clearance certificate from the River Conservator, issued tender notice on 05.03.2010 inviting sealed tenders for leasing out the right to quarrying sand in the sources in Guntur District as described in the Schedule appended thereto for a period of two years commencing from 01.04.2010 to 31.03.2012. According to Form-S6 appended to the said notice, the method of quarrying sand is by means of boats. The eight respondent stood as highest bidder in respect of Reach No.8 situate on the right bank of Krishna river in Amaravathi Mandal, Guntur District and pursuant thereto, the District Collector, Guntur District issued confirmation order on 29.03.2010 to it, stipulating certain guidelines and conditions for quarrying sand. The petitioner is the resident of Thotaravulapadu village, Chandarlapadu Mandal, Krishna District and is said to be an agriculturist having land to an extent of Ac.9.36 cents in R.S.No. 203/2 of the same village. His case as put-forth in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition is that the eighth respondent, who is the successful bidder in respect of reach No.8, is carrying on the sand quarry operations in violation of the auction conditions, such as using heavy machinery for transportation of the sand. It is his case that due to illegal sand transportation by the eighth respondent, the lands of the petitioner and others are being filled with sand, due to which, they are suffering irreparable loss and mental agony in as much as their standing crops are damaged. It is his grievance that though he has filed several representations on 14.1.2011, 5.2.2011, 20.03.2011 and 25.03.2011, no action has been initiated by the respondent authorities in preventing the illegal sand quarry operations being carried on by the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the eighth respondent is carrying on sand quarry operations in violation of the auction conditions and that the same was brought to the notice of respondent authorities by way of various written representations. It is his further case that the respondent authorities have acted upon his representations and even dismissed the officials responsible including an Assistant Director of Mines and Geology for their inaction in the matter. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that he has raised crops in his lands and owing to the illegal transportation of sand by the eighth respondent through his lands the standing crops in his lands are being damaged and that though he submitted several representations to the respondent authorities bringing the said fact to their notice, the same did not evoke any response from them. He therefore sought to challenge the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in this regard. Trite to state, this Court while exercising extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot go into the disputed facts of question and cannot make roving enquiry in regard thereto. If the standing crops of the petitioner are damaged because of the illegal transportation of the sand by the eighth respondent, which is a disputed question of fact, this Court cannot adjudicate and decide the same in a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the alleged illegal transportation of the sand through his standing crops over the lands, it is for him to approach a competent Court of law and work out his remedies. For the foregoing reasons, I do not find any merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ------------------------------ ------ JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA Dated 30th June, 2011. Msnro