P. Venkateswara Rao, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 956 AP

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI


     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE
                               &
             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

                        WRIT APPEAL No.70 of 2021

                         (Through video conferencing)

P. Venkateswara Rao                                                ... Appellant

                                      Versus

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its
Principal Secretary, Industries and Commerce
(Mines) Department, A.P. Secretariat,
Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh,
and another                                                    ... Respondents


Counsel for the appellant         :      Mr. Hari Sreedhar

Counsel for the respondents       :      Govt. Pleader for Mines & Geology

                             JUDGMENT (ORAL)

Dt:18.02.2021

(ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ)

Heard Mr. Hari Sreedhar, learned counsel for the appellant and the

Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for the respondents.

2. This Writ Appeal is presented against the order dated 28.12.2020

passed in W.P.No.25190 of 2020.

3. By the aforesaid order, learned single Judge disposed of the Writ

Petition recording as follows:

"Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking

into consideration the provisions of Rule 35 of the Rules, Writ

Petition is disposed of, leaving it open for the petitioner herein to

prefer statutory appeal before the Assistant Director of Mines &

Geology, Anakapalli-second respondent herein within a period of

one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also

open for the petitioner herein to file a stay application along with

the said appeal. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of

the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent

authorities not to take any coercive steps for a period of six weeks

from today. If any such appeal, within the time stipulated above,

is filed, the same be considered and appropriate orders be passed,

strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, after

giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner herein. There shall

be no order as to costs. All contentions are left open."

4. Mr. Hari Sreedhar, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that

demand notice dated 10.11.2020 issued by the 2nd respondent is without

jurisdiction and, therefore, this Court may like to examine the issue raised

by the appellant with regard to the question of jurisdiction.

5. At the outset, it is to be noted that learned single Judge has wrongly

recorded that statutory appeal lies before the Assistant Director of Mines &

Geology and it should have been recorded as Director of Mines & Geology,

to avail remedy of statutory appeal.

6. Having regard to the subject matter in dispute, we are of the opinion

that learned single Judge was justified in relegating the appellant to the

statutory remedy of appeal before the appellate authority and, therefore, we

do not think it is a fit case to interfere with the order of the learned single

Judge. However, we observe that, in case appeal is filed within (7) days

from today and in the event there arises delay in preferring the statutory

appeal, the appellate authority shall condone the delay and proceed to hear

the appeal on merits. It is also observed that if any application for stay is

filed, as indicated by learned single Judge, same shall also be considered

in accordance with law.

7. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ       C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J

MRR