M/S. Sree Srinivasa Stone Crusher vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1527 AP

       THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDHAN RAO

                          W.P.NO.7591 OF 2022

ORDER:-

         The petitioner was granted a lease over four hectares of land in

Sy.No.1481 of Dornakambala Village, Chandragiri Mandal, Chittoor District,

on 14.02.2017, for quarrying road metal and building stones. Aggrieved by

the demand notice No.241-4/V&E/NR-TPT/2013, dated 13.06.2014, for a

sum of Rs.12,73,500/- issued by the 4th respondent, the petitioner had

filed a revision before the 1st respondent under Rule 35-A of the A.P.

Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966. This revision has been disposed of

by the 1st respondent vide Memo No.1153/M.I(1)/2021, dated 02.09.2021

reducing the demand amount to Rs.6,36,750/-. Aggrieved by the said

Memo dated 02.09.2022, the petitioner has approached this Court by way

of the present writ petition.

         The contention of the petitioner is that the said revisional order

does not contain any reasons and as such the same is violative of

principles of natural justice and requires to be set aside. The petitioner

relied upon a judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Sree

Srinivasa Stone Crusher vs. State of Andhra Pradesh1. This case

relates to the petitioner herein himself.

         A perusal of the impugned order shows that the 1st respondent has

not given any reasons for passing the impugned order.

         In view of the judgment of the learned Single Judge in the case of

the petitioner, cited above, and in view of the fact that there are no

reasons attributed in the impugned order, it must be held that the




1
    2020 SCC ONLINE AP 4386
                                      2
                                                                      RRR,J
                                                        W.P.No.7591 of 2022



impugned order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice and

has to be set aside.

      Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is

set aside remanding the revision back to the 1st respondent for an

appropriate order to be passed. Needless to say, the said order shall

contain reasons. There shall be no order as to costs.

      As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

closed.


                                           __________________________
                                           R. RAGHUNANDHAN RAO, J.

28th March, 2022 Js.

RRR,J W.P.No.7591 of 2022

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

W.P.No.7591 of 2022

28th March, 2022

Js