THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No.181 of 2014 DATE: 10.11.2014 Between:
Dr. D. Shankar, Nizamabad District and others.
… Petitioners And Government of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries and Commerce (SPIU & SAND) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
… Respondents This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No.181 of 2014 Order: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This Writ Petition in Public Interest Litigation has been filed for issuing writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in granting temporary permits for de-casting (extraction) of sand in patta lands in Nizamabad District along the river of Manjeera, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and also law laid down by the Apex Court. Further direction is sought to restrain the respondents from granting any temporary permits for de-casting of sand in patta lands without obtaining environmental clearance from the MoEF.
Counter-affidavit has been filed by the 6th respondent and in the counter- affidavit, it has been stated in paragraph 2 that the Government has formulated new sand policy and framed guidelines for the extraction and transportation of ordinary sand vide G.O.Ms.No.154 Industries & Commerce (Mines-I) Department dated 15.11.2012, as amended by subsequent order dated 17.12.2013. These guidelines have been amended by the A.P. Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1966. Rule 9-L of the said Rules provides for various measures to be taken for granting temporary permits for de-casting of sand from patta lands. It is also stated in paragraph 3 that in Nizamabad District for de-casting of sand from patta land, applications are processed as per the above Government Orders and the guidelines issued by the Government.
According to us, when the Government has framed the guidelines in exercise of statutory power, they have to be followed and accepted unless they are struck down by the competent Court of law.
Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the above guidelines are not serving the purpose as they are not in conformity with the direction given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case relied on by him and the same has been annexed to the writ petition. In substance, he says that the above guidelines are in violation of the directions given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
We notice from the counter affidavit that while granting temporary permits, all measures have been taken according to the guidelines issued by the Government. We do not find any illegality or infirmity. The challenge to the said rule and guidelines as addressed by the learned lawyer in this case cannot be entertained as the same has not been challenged by filing appropriate proceedings.
We do not find any reason to pass any order in this matter. Accordingly, the same is closed.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand closed. No order as to costs.
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 10.11.2014 va