Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
J. Lakshmi Narayana Reddy vs State Of Ap on 13 August, 2020
Author: Jitendra Kumar Maheshwari
Bench: Jitendra Kumar Maheshwari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISIDICTION) és SAS. gn Coe yee uk Hf Ly tha LG art ob 4 THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENDY "Se | :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI.JITENDRA KUMAR MAHESHWARI AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WP (PIL) NO: 178 OF 2020 Between: 4. J. Lakshmi Narayana Reddy, S/o. Jayaram Reddy, Age.59 years , R/o Erlapalem village, H/o Chinthakalva, Vadamalapet Mandal, Chittoor district K. Jayakrishna, S/o. Srinivasulu, Age. 24 years, K. Kuppaia, S/o. Ramachandraiah, Age. 48 years, Ch. Gopi, S/o. Subbaiah, Age. 59 years, P. Sivaiah, S/o. Chengalrayulu, Age.61 years, P. Ramesh, S/o. Ramachandraiah Age. 54 years, Oakwnd Petitioners 2 to 6 are residents of Chinthakalva, Vadamalapet Mandal, Chittoor District .. Petitioners AND 4. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Pri. Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor, Chittoor district. 4. The Tahsildar, Vadamalapet Mandal, Chittoor district 5. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Pri. Secretary to Govt, Industries and Commerce (Mines) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur district. 6. The Director of Mines and Geology, Andhra Pradesh At Gollapudi, Vijayawada, Krishna district. 7. The Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Officers Lane, Chittoor, Chittoor district. 8. The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Chittoor, Chittoor district. weeeee Respondents Petition under Article 226 Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in this petition, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in taking steps to grant house-site. pattas in the land situated in Sy.Nos.168, 200 and 207 of Kayam village, Chinthakalva Gram Panchayat, Vadamalpet Mandal, Chittoor District, ignoring the fact that the said -- land contain the sub-soil mineral wealth is illegal and contrary to Memo No.18617/M.|(2)/2000-2, dated 28.3.2001 issued by the 'st respondent and also in violation of G.O.Ms.No.74, dated 16.2.2002 issued by the Sth respondent and consequently direct the respondents not to use the land situated in Sy.Nos.168, 200 and 207 of Kayam village, Chinthakalva Gram Panchayat, Vadamalpet Mandal, Chittoor District for any purpose other than exploitation of mineral. IA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ (PIL) petition, the High Court may be pleased direct the respondents not to take any hasty steps to convert the land situated in Sy.Nos.168, 200 and 207 of Kayam village, Chinthakalva Gram Panchayat, Vadamalpet Mandal, Chittoor District for granting house-site pattas, ignoring the fact that the said survey numbers contain mineral wealth, pending disposal of WP(PIL) 178 of 2020, on the file of the High Court. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI.LN.SSUBBA RAO Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Additional Advocate General for Respondents, the Court made the following. ORDER:
(Through Video Conferencing) W.P.(PIL) No.169 of 2020 has been filed questioning the action of the respondents in identifying the land admeasuring Ac.1307.26 cents in Sy.Nos.769, 388, 420, 208 and 418, situated at Konijedu, Marlapadu and Kanduluru villages in Tanguturu mandal and Sarvareddipalem and Yerrajerla villages in Ongole mandal of Prakasam District, respectively, for the purpose of assigning the same for house site pattas for landless poor, under the scheme "NAVARATNALU- PEDALANDARIKIILLU".
W.P.(PIL) No.178 of 2020 has been filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in taking steps to grant house site pattas in the land situated in Sy.Nos.168, 200 and 207 of Kayam village, Chinthakalva Gram Panchayat, Vadamalpet Mandal, Chittoor District.
W.P.No.10798 of 2020 has been filed by the company in whose favour sub- lease has been granted of mineral covered by the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (in short "the Act").
W.P.No.10943 of 2020 has also been filed in respect of the same piece of land.
In W.P.(PIL) No.169 of 2020 and other writ petitions connected and listed for hearing today, the questions that arise for consideration are whether the land identified as mineral land for quarries can be resumed by the District Collector by passing the order?; and whether such land can be assigned by the Government for assignment of house site pattas under the scheme "NAVARATNALU- PEDALANDARIKI ILLU". At first blush, in W.P.(PIL) No169 of 2020, on 31.07.2020, learned Additional Advocate General raised an objection that the said writ petition has been filed by the son of the petitioner in W.P.No.10943 of 2020; therefore, it is a manipulated and persuaded Public Interest Litigation. The said contention was refuted by the counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, stating that if respondents file the said objection on an affidavit, he is ready to face all consequences in case it is found correct. Taking note of the said rival contentions, an opportunity was granted to the State Government to file counter- affidavit raising preliminary objection as well as on merit. Counter-affidavit has been filed in W.P.(PIL) No.169 of 2020 as well as in W.P.No.10943 of 2020, while in other two cases, counter-affidavit has not been filed. The Additional Advocate General has not raised any objection on the said issue; so we ignore that objection. In view of the same, we have decided to consider the issue of grant of interim relief: therefore, we have heard the arguments for the purpose of grant of interim relief in these matters.
As per Board Standing Order 15(2), the lands prima facie not available for assignment are poramboke reserve lands (assessed and unassessedq). While describing the same in BSO 15(4)(2)(j), it is clarified that the lands containing minerals, quarries etc., are prohibited for assignment. In the context of the said legal situation, it is not in dispute that the lands which are containing minerals and quarries are prohibited from assignment by BSO. It is also not in dispute that the lands which are resumed are containing minerals. By order passed by the District Collector dated 30.01.2020, the lands in Ongole have been resumed under the scheme "NAVARATNALU-PEDALANDARIKI {LLU", under which the State Government has decided to grant house site pattas to the poor persons. In this regard, Government has issued various circulars resuming the lands of various types.
In W.P.(PIL) No.178 of 2020, the argument advanced by counsel for the | petitioners is that the lands containing mineral, particularly, major mineral are required to be governed by the provisions of the Act. Under Section 18, it is the domain of the Central Government to look into and formulate the Rules. Therefore, the lands containing the mineral covered by the provisions of the said Act cannot be assigned by virtue of the orders passed by the State Government. The reference made by the learned Additional Advocate General to BSO 15 prescribing special rule is misplaced and do not apply to the present case. In the said context, the State Government under the directions of the Mines and Minerals Department, issued notice on 46.02.2002 identifying the clusters of the land containing minor mineral. It is also not in dispute that the lands situated in Ongole have been given to the Mining Corporation and the Mining Corporation in turn entered into agreement of lease for excavation of iron ore. Therefore, sub- lease has also been executed and the sub-lessee has filed W.P.No.10798 of 2020, challenging the action of the Government in assigning the lands under lease, inter alia, contending that the lands covered by the provisions of the Act cannot be taken without the approval of the Central Government as they are covered by the provisions of the said Act for major mineral. He referred the letter of the Industries & Commerce Department dated 09.06.2005. At the time of grant, permission was sought from the Central Government. The said permission was granted vide order dated 27.11.2008 by the Central Government with a condition that the State Government should obtain prior approval of the Central Government in case any change is sought to be permitted by the State Government in the ownership of the mining lease in respect of which, prior approval is being granted. He has further referred the clauses of the agreement under which the benefit has to go to the Government. He has also referred to the letter of the Industries Department dated 13.06.2005 in which it is clarified that the lands which are identified for the purpose of mines and minerals, DKT pattas of the range of 1000 meters shall not be granted. Ignoring all these provisions of the Act, the State Government has resumed the land covered by the provisions of the Act and after resuming such land, under the executive instructions, by orders of the Collector, house site pattas are being granted under the "NAVARATNALU-PEDALANDARIKI ILLU" Scheme. The letter addressed by the A.P.M.D.C., dated 06.02.2020 has also been referred, whereby the Corporation requested for cancellation of such order of remission. In view of the foregoing circumstances as referred hereinabove, the question of granting interim relief is being considered.
On the other hand, the State Government has filed reply, inter alia, contending that it is not in dispute that the lands contain minerals but the said grant of lease was long back, i.e., more than 10 years; however, as the lands were lying idle for a long time, Government, under the provisions of BSO 15, referring special procedure, directed the authority to pass orders. In furtherance to the same, the Collector has given power to pass order for resumption by the Government and accordingly order of resumption has been passed. It is to be noted here that the land in question is situated 5 to 9 Kms. from Ongole town and therefore certain objections have been received from neighbours and agriculturists for excavation of mineral. As the Government has decided to grant house site pattas and as sufficient land is not available looking to the number of persons who applied, therefore, the order impugned has been passed resuming the land.
After hearing counsel for the parties, prima facie, we are of the considered opinion that in respect of the land covered by the provisions of the Act, the State Government do not have any power to assign the same until consent of the Central Government has been taken. We are further of the Opinion that as per BSO 15(4), the lands containing minerals and quarries are not available for assignment and such assignments are prohibited. It is not in dispute that BSOs., are having force of law; therefore, issuing instructions contrary to such BSOs., that too, in respect of the land containing minerals and quarries, cannot be implemented. All the executive instructions issued by the State Government contrary to the statutes cannot be implemented by the authorities and if they act upon the same to create third party right, the same is not permissible under law merely under the "NAVARATNALU-PEDALANDARIKI ILLU" scheme floated by the State Government.
It is seen that hundreds of petitions have been filed in the matter of allotment of land under the scheme "NAVARATNALU-PEDALANDARIKI ILLU", which are being listed every day. As interim order in the present case is being granted towards the land recorded for minerals and quarries, therefore, we enlarge the scope of the Public Interest Litigation filed by the petitioners insofar as Prakasam and Chittoor Districts are concerned and direct, by way of interim relief, that, in the entire State of Andhra Pradesh, any of the lands containing minerals and quarries covered by BSO 15(4) are prohibited for assignment and they shall not be included under the Scheme "NAVARATNALU-PEDALANDARIKI ILLU". It is made clear here that this order would be applicable not only with respect to Prakasam and Chittoor Districts, but also to the entire State of Andhra Pradesh in the matter of assignment of lands containing minerals and quarries, that too, major minerals covered under the provisions of the Act.
Respondents are directed to file counter-affidavits in the cases in which they have not filed and after filing of counter-affidavits, these cases be listed in due course.
SD/-K.TATA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITTRUE COPYI/ .
For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To
1. The Secretary, Ministries of Mines, Union of India, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi.
2. The Principal Secretary, Industries and Commerce Department (Mines), State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velgapudi, Amaravati.
The Director, Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Co-operation Ltd., Kanuru, Vijayawada.
The District Collector, Chittoor District.
The Tahsildar, Vadamalpet Mandal, Chittoor District.
The Tahsildar, Tangutoru Mandal, Prakasam District The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor, Chittoor District.
The Principal Secretary to Govt., Industries and Commerce (Mines) Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.
9. The Director of Mines and Geology, Andhra Pradesh At Gollapudi, Vijayawada, Krishna District.
10. The Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Officers Lane, Chittoor, Chittoor District.
11. The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Chittoor, Chittoor District (1 to 11 by RPAD)
12.One CC to SRI.N.SUBBA RAO , Advocate [OPUC]
13. Two CC to THE ADVOCATE GENERAL, High Court of A.P. at Amaravathi OUT 14.5wo Spare copies o CON OOS SRL HIGH COURT HCJ & LKJ DATED:13.08.2020 ORDER WP(PIL).No.178 of 2020 DIRECTION