Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Juvvanaboyina Lakshmana Rao, vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh on 12 October, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU
WRIT APPEAL No.678 OF 2022
(Through physical mode)
Juvvanaboyina Lakshmana Rao,
Aged about 38 years, Hindu, Male,
S/o. Venkateswara Rao,
R/o. D.No. 4-36, Gollagudem,
Chinna Agiripalli, Krishna District, and others.
..Appellants
versus
The Government of Andhra Pradesh,
Represented by its Principal Secretary,
Mines and Geology Department,
A.P. Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi,
Amaravati, and others.
...Respondents
Counsel for the appellants : Mr. Paleti V.R. Maheswara Rao
Counsel for respondents 1&2 : GP for Mines & Geology
Counsel for respondent No.3 : GP for Revenue
Counsel for respondent No.4 : Mr. O. Manohar Reddy, Sr. Counsel,
for Mr. T. Vishnu Teja
ORAL JUDGMENT
Dt: 12.10.2022
(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)
This writ appeal is directed against the interim order dated 01.09.2022
passed by a learned single Judge in W.P.No.25997 of 2022, modifying the
earlier interim order dated 25.08.2022 passed in the said writ petition.
HCJ & DVSS,J
2. The writ petition was filed by the appellants herein questioning the
proceedings bearing Nos.1663/TP/2022 and 1664/TP/2022 dated 20.07.2022
and proceedings No.1662/TP/2022 dated 23.06.2022 issued by the Assistant
Director of Mines & Geology, Vijayawada, granting temporary permits in favour
of respondent No.4 for excavating the gravel from the lands admeasuring
Ac.8.50 cents situated in RS.No.2/1 of Thotapalli Village, Agiripalli Mandal,
Krishna District. When the writ petition came up for hearing on 25.08.2022,
learned single Judge, having heard both sides and having regard to the fact
that there is a dispute as to the nature of the exemption granted under the
Notification dated 28.03.2020, directed respondent No.4 not to take up further
excavation till the next date of hearing. Thereafter, when the matter came up
before another single Bench on 01.09.2022, the aforesaid interim order dated
25.08.2022 was modified permitting respondent No.4 to quarry the gravel/
ordinary earth for the purpose of laying road as mentioned in Condition No.9 of
the permission granted on 20.07.2022. Aggrieved by the said modification of
the earlier order, the writ petitioners are in appeal.
3. By order dated 05.09.2022 passed in this appeal, we have suspended
the modified order dated 01.09.2022 and the said order of suspension has
been continuing.
4. When the appeal was taken up on 16.09.2022, learned counsel for the
appellants submitted that despite the interim order passed by this Court, illegal
mining has been going on in the subject area. It was also submitted that after
HCJ & DVSS,J
the interim order was passed, a false F.I.R. has been registered by the police
with a view to harass the appellants/writ petitioners. In view of the said
submissions, while directing the Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, to
ensure compliance of the orders of this Court, we required the Station House
Officer, Agiripalli Police Station, Eluru District, to appear before this Court today
along with entire case diary of the F.I.R. registered against the appellants/writ
petitioners.
5. Pursuant to the said order dated 16.09.2022, Mr. N. Chanti Babu,
Station House Officer, Agiripalli Police Station, Eluru District, is present before
this Court today along with copy of the F.I.R. in Crime No.346 of 2022 and the
case diary pertaining to the said crime. The said F.I.R. was registered on the
information given by respondent No.4 on 25.08.2022, i.e., on the same day on
which earlier interim order was passed by the writ Court directing him not to
take up further excavation. It appears, respondent No.4 is trying to overreach
the interim order passed against him by approaching the concerned police with
a view to threaten the appellants/writ petitioners. The said approach of
respondent No.4 is not at all appreciable.
6. Be that as it may, a perusal of the order dated 01.09.2022 would show
that without assigning any reasons as to why modification of the earlier order
is required and without dealing with the substance which prevailed upon the
earlier single Bench which has passed the said interim order, the modification
was ordered. In view of the same and given the background of the case as
HCJ & DVSS,J
discussed above, we are of the considered opinion that it would be appropriate
to set aside the order dated 01.09.2022 and make the earlier interim order
dated 25.08.2022 absolute.
7. Accordingly, the earlier interim order dated 25.08.2022 passed in
W.P.No.25997 of 2022 is made absolute and the subsequent order dated
01.09.2022 is set aside. Let the writ petition be disposed of by the single
Bench at the earliest.
8. We deem it appropriate that a separate suo motu contempt proceedings
be registered to examine whether illegal mining activity has taken place despite
the interim order dated 25.08.2022 passed in the writ petition and the order
dated 05.09.2022 passed in this writ appeal. Registry is directed to take steps
in that regard and post the suo motu contempt case for consideration on
17.10.2022.
9. Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. Pending
miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU, J
IBL
