The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.23377 of 2007
Dated 25th June, 2010
Between:
Sri Srinivasa Transport Co., …Petitioner And The Government of A.P., and 2 others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Mr.C.V.R.Rudra Prasad Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2: AGP for Mines & Geology Counsel for respondent No.3: Mr.C.Upender The Court made the following:
Order:
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.2, in granting stay against order, dated 25-09-2007, passed by respondent No.1, in respect of land and building comprised in Survey No.70 of Makavaram Village, Anakapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, pending appeal filed by the petitioner-Company under Rule 35 of the A.P.Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, as arbitrary and illegal.
As seen from the averments contained in the affidavit, the grievance of the petitioner-Company is that it filed an appeal along with an application for interim stay before respondent No.2 against order, dated 25-09-2007, passed by respondent No.1, permitting respondent No.3 to operate quarry of road metal and building stone over an extent of 1.450 hectares in the above-mentioned survey number for a period of ten years from 25-09-2007 to 21-09-2007. As the petitioner’s application for interim stay was not disposed of pending the appeal, it has filed the present Writ Petition.
Though this Writ Petition was admitted on 03-12-2007, no interim orders were granted. After taking time on 22-06- 2010, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology reported to the Court that the petitioner’s appeal is pending before respondent No.1.
In view of lapse of more than 2 ½ years from the time of filing of this Writ Petition and in the absence of any interim order granted by this Court, the purpose of the application filed by the petitioner for staying operation of the proceedings of respondent No.1, issued in favour of respondent No.3, has virtually become redundant. However, since the appeal filed by the petitioner before respondent No.2, in which the cause very much survives, is pending, it is appropriate that the same is disposed of by respondent No.2 in a time bound manner. Accordingly, respondent No.2 is directed to dispose of the petitioner’s appeal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after giving notice to the petitioner and respondent No.3.
Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.30458 of 2007, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 25th June, 2010
lur