Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
M/S Ongole Iron Ore Mining Company Pvt ... vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh on 13 August, 2020
Author: J K Maheshwari
Bench: J K Maheshwari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISIDICTION) THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRILJITENDRA KUMAR MAHESHWARI AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO: 10798 OF 2020 Between: 4. M/s Ongole Iron Ore Mining Company Pvt Itd., Rep. by its Director Anand Bakki Door No.74-12/1, 134/B, 4th Floor, Electricity colony, Road No.10, Patamata, Vijayawada-520007, Krishna District, AP 2. Ms. AP Iron Ore Mining Company Ltd., Rep. by its Director Anand Bakki Door No.74-12/1, 131/B, 4th Floor, Electricity colony, Road No.10, Patamata, Vijayawada-520007, Krishna District, AP 3. Gimpex Private Ltd., Rep. by its Director Anand Bakki Door No.74-12/1, 131/B, 4th Floor, Electricity colony, Road No.10, Patamata, Vijayawada-520007, Krishna District, AP Petitioners AND 4. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Assignment.|) Department, Rep., - by its Principal Secretary, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh 2. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Lands-l) Department, Rep., by its Secretary, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh 3 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Industries and Commerce (M.I1) Department, Rep., by its Secretary, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh 4. The Ministry of Mines, Government of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Shasthri Bhavan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi-110001 5. The AP Mineral Development Corporation Limited, Rep. by its Managing Director, 294/1D, 100 Ft. Road, Kanuru Village, Tadigadapa-Enkepadu, Penamaluru Mandal, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh-521137 The District Collector and Magistrate, Ongole, Prakasam District, AP The Tahsildar, Ongole Mandal, Ongole, Prakasam District, AP The Tahsildar, Tangutur Mandal, Tanguturu, Prakasam District CoN ® Respondents . Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Count may oe bie ved te Bsue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandar . deck Fe reer of the Collector and District Magistrate of Prakasam District 2 onal " vide E.No.490/2016(E1), dated 31-01-2020, as arbitrary, illegal, ultra vi gainst Principles of Natural Justice and Unconstitutional and to set aside the same. 1A NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC i i Pet praying that in the circumst i orepond aes Ne supp a petition, the High Court may be nleased to direct the 0.1 to 3 and 6 to 8, not to assign or alienate or creat , e any int om i. favour S ay aan OeR land admeasuring 1307.26 saree situated in é , , , , & 418 of Konijedu, Marla Sarvireddypalem and Yerrajerla villages of Tanguturu and Oryole Mandals. of Prakasam District or deliver possession of it or part of it, pending disposal of WP 10798 of 2020, on the file of the High Court. IA NO: 2 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the Ongole vide E.No.490/2016(E1) dated 31-01-2020, & its consequential acts, Pending disposal of WP 10798 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.T SREEDHAR 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- PEDALANDARIKI ILLU".
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 . hearing today, the questions that arise for consideration are whether the = identified as mineral land for quarries can be resumed by the District Collector , passing the order?; and whether such land can be assigned Py the ee for assignment of house site pattas under the scheme eee or oot, PEDALANDARIKI! ILLU". At first blush, in W.P.(PIL) Not69 of 2020, on 31.07. :
learned Additional Advocate General raised an objection that the ane petition has been filed by the son of the petitioner in W.P.No.10943 o ;
therefore, it is a manipulated and persuaded Public interest Litigation. The said erefore, 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 unassessed). 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 ILLU", 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 16.02.2002 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 "NAVARA TNALU-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-PEDALANDARIK] 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. JAGAN MOHAN DEPUTY REGISTRAR TRUE COPY// SECTION Cay Qh, To,
1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue (Assignment.|) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh
2. The Secretary, Revenue (Lands-l) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh
3. The Secretary, Industries and Commerce (M.II) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh
4. The Secretary, Ministry of Mines, Government of India, Shasthri Bhavan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi-1 10001
5. The Managing Director, AP Mineral Development Corporation Limited, 294/1D, 100 Ft. Road, Kanuru Village, Tadigadapa-Enkepadu, Penamaluru Mandal, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh-521137
6. The District Collector and Magistrate, Ongole, Prakasam District, AP
7. The Tahsildar, Ongole Mandal, Ongole, Prakasam District, AP
8. The Tahsildar, Tangutur Mandal, Tanguturu, Prakasam District (1 TO 8 by RPAD)
9. One CC to SRI.T.SREEDHAR Advocate [OPUC]
10.Two CCs to THE ADVOCATE GENERAL, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh.
[OUT]
11.One spare copy SRL HIGH COURT HCJ & LKJ DATED:13.08.2020 ORDER WP.No.10798 of 2020 DIRECTION