THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WP NO. 25038 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is instituted for declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the work of the petitioner in laying and strengthening the ramp for quarrying sand as well as retrieving the machinery or trucks which got stranded or broken down while transporting sand, as bad in law. It is submitted that in the public auctions that were conducted pursuant to the notification dated 28.4.2011 published by the 1st respondent herein, the petitioners bid in a sum of Rs.62.50 lakhs was considered as the most responsive for the sand reach of Nagaladinne village, Nandavaram Mandal, Kurnool district. Accordingly, confirmation proceedings were issued in favour of the petitioner on 23.5.2011 and the petitioner has complied with the rest of the formalities and executed the necessary lease deed. The case of the petitioner is that for purposes of approaching the sand reach, paths/ramps have got to be constructed and they also may require constant upkeep and maintenance. Ramps are formed so as to enable the trucks and tractors to motor up to the reach where they can be loaded with the mineral and then with the mineral, they should be able to reach the road point. Since, there will be motor vehicle traffic moving on the ramps, they need to be formed using machinery such as rollers etc. When the petitioner was taking such measures for formation and maintenance of the ramps, the said activities have been objected to by the respondents. It is true that the leasehold rights have been granted in favour of the petitioner subject to the condition that he shall not use any machinery for the purpose of extracting the mineral, but at the same time, condition Nos. 17, contained in paragraph (6) of the lease deed executed in Form G-(1) in favour of the petitioner authorises him to use the ramps and paths for the purpose of transportation of sand from the quarry and the lessee is not authorised to open ramps or paths without obtaining prior permission of the authorities as well as the pattedars concerned. The grievance of the petitioner is that the ramps and pathways are needed to be formed for the purposes of extraction and transportation of the mineral sand and that the petitioner is required to maintain them and keep them in a fit condition so that the mineral extracted can be transported from the reach. Otherwise, the mineral cannot be loaded into the transporting vehicles at the reach. It will also be appropriate to notice that Rule 9-X(e) of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules prohibits the bidders/leaseholders from using proclains or any other machinery for the purpose of digging or loading of the mineral. Therefore, usage of machinery either for formation or for consolidation job or maintenance of the ramp or pathways is not completely prohibited by the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules. Therefore, the respondents cannot possibly prevent the petitioner from using any machinery such as rollers etc., in the matter of formation, consolidation, maintenance and upkeep of the ramps and pathways, to keep them in a fit condition for the trucks and tractors which are laid with sand to transport the said mineral using such ramps or pathways. However, to avoid any such confusion, the petitioner is directed to furnish the details of the machinery which the petitioner intends to use for formation or maintenance work of ramps and pathways. The 3rd respondent will authorize immediately the usage of such machinery and 3rd respondent will not object the usage of machinery only for the purpose of formation or maintenance of ramps and pathways. The 3rd respondent will be perfectly legitimate to raise objection with regard to usage of proclains or any other machinery used for either digging or transportation or extracting the mineral. If any vehicle or machinery breaks down, the said fact may be brought to the notice of the Assistant Director duly furnishing the necessary details including the registration marks available on such vehicles or machinery so that the 3rd respondent will be able to undertake an inspection thereof. So long as such machinery is not used for extracting mineral, the 3rd respondent shall not prevent the writ petitioner from retrieving any such stranded or broken down machinery or vehicles from the ramps or pathways. But, if he finds that the machinery was used for extracting the mineral or it’s transportation, the 3rd respondent will take appropriate action in the matter. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. No costs. ------------- Knk 12.09.2011