IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 2077 of 2008 Between: M/s. Aditya Minerals (P) Limited, represented by its Director Sri Vinod Choudary, S/o. Babu Lal, aged about 53 years, Having its Office at H.No. 6-5-651, Hameedpura, Adilabad - 504 001. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Government of India, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Mines, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001. 2 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Secretary, Industries and Commissioner, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 The Director, Mines and Geology, 8th floor, BRKR Buildings, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad. 4 The Zonal Joint Director, Mines and Geology, # 2-2-1105/26/A, Tilak Nagar, New Nallakunta, Hyderabad - 500 044. 5 The Deputy Director, Mines and Geology, Nizamabad Region,# 6-2- 200/83/C Subhash Nagar, Nizamabad 503 001. 6 The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, H.No.6-58/1, Janakaprasada Nilayam, Near Fire Station, Mancherial, Adilabad- 504 208 7 The Collector, Adilabad District. 503 001. 8 M/s. Sirisha Enterprises, represented by its Managing Partner Sri. N. Rahul Reddy. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or writ one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent made in favour of the 8th respondent vide Lr.No.12114/M.III(2)/2007-1, dated 12.09.2007 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Rules made there under apart from being violative of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to recommend the Mining Lease application dated 07.07.2005 of the petitioner company as required under Section 11 and 5(1) (b) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 for prior approval of the 1st respondent for grant of lease in the interest of law and justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.N.SHOBA Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 7 : G.P for Mines & Geology Counsel for Respondent No.8 : MS.H.Seetha Devi. The Court made the following : W.P.No.2077 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent made in favour of the 8th respondent vide Lr.No.12114/M.III(2)/2007-1, dated 12.09.2007 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Rules made thereunder and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to recommend the mining lease application dated 07.07.2005 of the petitioner company as required under Section 11 and 5 (1) (b) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 for prior approval of the 1st respondent for grant of lease. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology. During the course of hearing, the learned Government Pleader produced the proceedings dated 25.02.2008 and brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner has filed an application for grant of mining lease on 07.07.2005 and it was rejected. He also submits that against the said rejection, there is a remedy by way of revision. Since the petitioner has effective and efficacious remedy of revision before the revisional authority i.e., 1st respondent, I am of the considered view that this writ petition is not maintainable. W.P.No.2077 of 2008 The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is given liberty to approach the 1st respondent and file a revision in accordance with law. No costs. ____________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 28-03-2008 Gsn.