IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No :31351 of 2011 Between: M/s Amulya Minerals represented by its Proprietor Dhulipalla Rama Govind, S/o D.Ramaiah, R/o Kondayapalem village, Ballikurva Mandal, Prakasam District. . .Petitioner And 1.The Director, Mines & Geology, Ongole and 4 others. .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 31351 of 2011 O R D E R: Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 3, 4 and 5. 2. The petitioner has applied for grant of quarry lease under the application dated 19.01.2011 in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 181 Industries & Commerce (Mines-I) Department, dated 28.05.1998. An expeditious disposal of such application is regulated by the procedure prescribed under the said G.O. The main grievance of the petitioner is that though the report from the 5th respondent-Tahsildar is called for by the 2nd respondent-Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, but the report is not sent in terms of the G.O. directly to the 2nd respondent within the time prescribed. The learned Counsel for the petitioner relied upon similar grievance redressed by order of this Court in Writ Petition No. 22568 of 2011 dated 10.08.2011 and requests for a similar direction. 3. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, submits that the report as required to be sent by the 5th respondent-Tahsildar, in terms of the aforesaid G.O. dated 28.05.1998, has been sent to the 3rd respondent-District Collector, Prakasam District as well as the 2nd respondent-Assistant Director of Mines & Geology on 01.06.2011. 4. In view of the above statement of the learned Government Pleader for Revenue, based on instructions, which he has received, the grievance of the petitioner does not survive as the 5th respondent-Tahsildar is stated to have sent his report to the 2nd respondent-Assistant Director of Mines and Geology. 5. The Writ Petition is, therefore, disposed of directing the 2nd respondent-Assistant Director of Mines and Geology to take an appropriate decision based on the report sent by the 5th respondent- Tahsildar, in terms of the G.O.Ms.No.181, dated 28-05-1998, within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. ___________________________________ JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR 28th November 2011 Gsn.