HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6693 of 2010 DATE:25.03.2010 Between: G. Bhaskar Rao … Petitioner and The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Industries & Commerce Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6693 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner has emerged as the highest bidder for Jonnada sand reach, Buchireddypalem Mandal, Nellore District, for the year 2009-2010, in the auction held on 15.09.2009. His offer was for a sum of Rs.4,60,00,000/- per year. As per the relevant provisions of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, (for short “the Rules”), irrespective of the date of its commencement, the lease for the first year would expire by 31st March of the succeeding year. The lease of 2nd year would, however, be for full calendar year up to 31st March of the subsequent year. The petitioner states that the lease in his favour commenced on 18.09.2009 and though he was under obligation to pay the proportionate lease amount for the 1st year, an amount of Rs.4,60,00,000/- covering the full year was collected. 2. There is an obligation to renew the lease for the 2nd year on payment of the bid amount of 1st year + 20% enhancement thereon, 45 days before the lease for 1st year expires. The petitioner made a representation, dated 10.02.2010, to the Director of Mines and Geology, Hyderabad, 2nd respondent, with a request to grant time for payment of the 2nd year lease amount. His grievance is that no action has been taken thereon, and that the authorities are trying to prevent him from operating the lease beyond 31.03.2010. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Industries & Commerce. 4. The lease for sand reaches is required to be given for two years, subject to certain conditions, after holding an auction. Irrespective of the date of commencement, the lease for the first year expires by 31st March of the succeeding year. Therefore, in almost all cases, the duration of the first year lease would be less than 12 months. No such problem exists with the second year. 5. The petitioner had hardly six months of lease for the first year. He was required to deposit proportionate amount. However, it is stated that the amount for the entire year i.e. Rs.4,60,00,000/- was collected by promising that the differential amount would be adjusted in the lease amount for the 2nd year. The petitioner has also stated that on account of certain reasons, he could not effectively operate the lease. The Government had the advantage of the amount almost to the extent of half of the year’s lease, well in advance from the petitioner. The 2nd respondent is conferred with the power to grant time for payment of the 2nd year lease amount. This Court feels that this is a fit case for exercise of such power. 6. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that (a) the petitioner shall be entitled to pay the amount demanded by the 4th respondent, through his notice, dated 04.02.2010, in two instalments – first on or before 15.04.2010 and second on or before 30.04.2010; (b) the respondents shall permit the petitioner to operate the sand reach till 30.04.2010 without the requirement of renewal of lease, since the amount deposited by the petitioner towards the first year lease is with the respondents; and (c) the right of the petitioner to operate the sand reach beyond 30.04.2010 shall depend upon the compliance with the conditions referred to above, and consequential renewal of 2nd year lease. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J 25th March, 2010. CBS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6693 of 2010 (Disposed of) 25th March, 2010 CBS