Telangana High Court
M/S. Dhanalaxmi Trading Company vs The State Of Telangana on 25 April, 2022
Author: P. Madhavi Devi
Bench: P. Madhavi Devi
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION NO.3266 OF 2022
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Mahabubnagar vide his notice No.64/M/2005, dt.05.01.2022 directing the petitioner to stop mining operations despite the petitioner having a valid permission till March, 2025, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of this Writ Petition are that the petitioner was granted mining lease for 20 years for mining of Quartz and Feldspar in an extent of 10 acres in Survey No.405 of Kodgal Village, Jedcharla Mandal, Mahabubnagar District and the lease subsists till 14.01.2025. However, by notice dt.05.01.2022, the 3rd respondent directed the petitioner to stop quarrying operations in the subject quarry lease held by the petitioner as per the injunction order of the Senior Civil Judge Court, until further orders. Challenging the said notice, this Writ Petition is filed.
W.P.No.3266 of 20222
3. As regards the civil dispute resulting in the order of the Senior Civil Judge Court, brief facts are that respondent No.4 was claiming title to the property through entries in khasra pahani for the year 1954-55. Since the names of Smt. V. Satyavani, Sri M. Jagan Reddy, Sri Gore Mallaiah, Smt. Gore Yadamma and Sri R. Sudhakar Reddy, were recorded as pattedars in the revenue records, he filed a revision before the Joint Collector, Mahabubnagar who referred the same to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubnagar with a direction to treat the same as an appeal for correction of entries in revenue records. The Revenue Divisional Officer allowed the appeal against which a revision was preferred before the Joint Collector, who confirmed the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer. The issue finally got adjudicated in W.P.No.26099 of 2012 and batch by the High Court. The High Court set aside the entries in the revenue records made in favour of respondent No.4 and held that the documents produced by him were obtained by playing fraud. The Hon'ble Court further directed the Tahsildar, Jedcharla to look into the original Khasra Pahani for ascertaining the title over the property and pass orders.
W.P.No.3266 of 20223
4. Consequently, the Tahsildar passed orders on 04.02.2014 after issuing notices to all the parties and held that the name of respondent No.4's father was not appearing in the original Khasra Pahani and that his name was subsequently added. Thereafter, respondent No.4 carried the matter in revision before the Joint Collector, Mahabubnagar and the Joint Collector granted an interim order to maintain status quo. According to the petitioner, under erroneous assumptions as regards the entries in the revenue records, the Assistant Director, Mines and Geology refused to give transport permits to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.10556 of 2014 and this Court was pleased to grant directions to the respondents on 15.04.2014 directing the Director of Mines and Geology to give instructions to the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology to grant despatch permits to the petitioner within 15 days from the date of the order, while respondent No.4 filed another Writ Petition in W.P.No.15405 of 2014 seeking directions to respondent No.3 to stop the mining operations being carried out by the petitioner in view of the status quo orders passed by the Joint Collector. However, the Joint Collector, Mahabubnagar vacated the status quo orders and dismissed W.P.No.3266 of 2022 4 the Revision Petition filed by respondent No.4 by his orders dt.03.10.2015. W.P.No.36518 of 2015 was filed by respondent No.4 challenging the order of the Joint Collector and since no interim suspension was granted, the orders of the Joint Collector are holding the field. It is submitted that respondent No.4 had withdrawn the Writ Petition on 06.12.2021 and thus the orders of the Joint Collector dt.03.10.2015 have become absolute. It is submitted that thereafter, respondent No.4 seems to have filed a suit before the Principal Senior Civil Judge's Court, Mahabubnagar in O.S.No.22 of 2020 for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the lands in Survey Nos.405 and 406 of Kodgal Village, Jedcharla Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.
5. On the ground that no counter is filed in the suit by the petitioner herein, the Civil Court has granted interim order against the petitioner restraining the petitioner herein from interfering with the possession of the subject property and respondent No.3 has accordingly issued the impugned order to the petitioner to stop the mining operations. It is the case of the petitioner that even though it had a valid permission till 14.01.2025, the direction of respondent No.4 to stop mining activity is W.P.No.3266 of 2022 5 illegal and arbitrary. He further submitted that the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Mahabubnagar had no authority to issue such directions.
6. Learned counsel for respondent No.4, Sri M. Damodar Reddy, is also heard. He has filed his counter and submitted that the Civil Court has granted interim orders in favour of respondent No.4 and therefore respondent No.3 has passed the impugned order and there is no irregularity or illegality in the order which needs interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
7. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, it is noticed that the impugned order is passed by the 3rd respondent consequent to the interim order given by the Civil Court. The petitioner is not a stranger to the civil suit, i.e., O.S.No.22 of 2020 and the petitioner is represented before the Civil Court. Though the petitioner has mining lease till 14.01.2025, it is the Civil Court which is having jurisdiction to declare the title and give a direction with regard to possession or change in the nature of the land. Since there is a dispute regarding the title and the petitioner is also a defendant in the suit, it can be seen that the interim order is not granted behind the back of the W.P.No.3266 of 2022 6 petitioner. The petitioner was given an opportunity to file counter, but it did not avail the opportunity. Therefore, the petitioner, instead of approaching the Civil Court for vacating the interim order, has filed this Writ Petition before this Court. Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the High Court can interfere only if there is illegality or irregularity in the actions of the respondents. Further, the petitioner has alternative remedy of approaching the Civil Court for getting the interim order vacated. In view thereof, this Writ Petition is not maintainable.
8. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
9. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Petition shall also stand dismissed.
___________________________ JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI Dt. 25.04.2022 Svv