IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO:14486 of 2001 Between: M/s Rita Industrial Corporation Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director Smt. K. Kavitha Reddy W/o Sri. K. Amarender Reddy Plot No.120, Road No.13, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500 034. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Industrial and Commerce (D-I, II) Department Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Director, Mines and Geology, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh B.R.K.Bhavan, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 3 The Deputy Director, Mines and Geology, Guntur District. 4 The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Ongole, Prakasham District. 5 The Principal Secretary to the Government, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries (A.H.III) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 6 The Director of Animal Husbandry, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 7 Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Rep. by its Managing Director, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.RAJENDRA PRASAD Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4:AGP FOR INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of mandamus to set aside G.O.Ms.No.23, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries (A.H III) Department, dated 22.02.1999 issued by respondent No.6 and proceedings, dated 22.06.2001 of respondent No.2. The petitioner company applied for mining lease in respect of land of an extent of Acs.20.00 in Survey No.55/3-C of R.L.Puram, Chimakurthy Mandal, Prakasam District, for a period of ﬁve years on 08.01.1991. It also made a similar application in respect of land of an extent of Ac.10.00 in Survey No.55/3-A for the same purpose. However, by the impugned G.O., the State Government accorded permission allotting an extent of Acs.268.70 cents of land including the land over which the petitioner applied for mining lease, in favour of Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’). At the hearing, Sri A.Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on Rule 12(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 (for short ‘the Rules’), which provided for order of preference in the matter of considering the applications for grant of mining lease. According to the said provision, applications of Government Department and Government Corporations and Companies are entitled to be given preference over other applications. The learned counsel, however, relied on the second proviso to the said Rule, which is to the eﬀect that in cases falling under categories (i) to (iii) mentioned in Rule 12(2) of the Rules, the grant of lease shall be subject to the condition that the lessee shall operate the quarry directly and shall not hand it over to others for working. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after the said G.O. was issued, the Corporation conducted auction of the leasehold rights to third parties and, therefore, the said action is liable to be declared as illegal. In my considered view, the action of the Government in giving preference to the Corporation is in conformity with Rule 12(2) of the Rules. If subsequent to the grant of lease in favour of the Corporation, it violated the condition contained in the second proviso to Rule 12(2) of the Rules, the same gives rise to a new cause of action for the petitioner. As the said action has not been challenged in this writ petition, no relief can be granted in favour of the petitioner. However, the petitioner is given liberty to question the subsequent action of the Corporation in auctioning the leasehold rights to third parties. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 11th SEPTEMBER, 2008. kvni