Telangana High Court
C.Shashi Kumar vs The State Of Telangana And 2 Others on 21 June, 2022
Author: G. Radha Rani
Bench: G. Radha Rani
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI
WRIT PETITION No.26300 of 2022
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed challenging the inaction of the 2nd respondent in granting interim order in the statutory revision filed by the petitioner under Rule 35-A of the Telangana State Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 (for short 'TSMMC Rules') against the order of the 3rd respondent dated 25.01.2022 in D.Dis. Proceedings No.12583/R2- 3/2021-4 as the same was arbitrary and illegal.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was granted prospecting licence for Quartz and Feldspar over an extent of Acs.10.00 gts. in Sy.No.76 of Chadurpally Village, Veldanda Mandal, erstwhile Mahaboobnagar District (presently Nagarkurnool district) for a period of two years with effect from 26.12.2013 to 25.12.2015. At the time of granting prospecting licence, Quartz and Feldspar were major minerals and were covered by the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. Thereafter, with effect from 10.02.2015, Quartz and Feldspar were declared as Minor Minerals by the Central Government. But no procedure was prescribed by Dr.GRR,J 2 WP No.26300 of 2022 the State Government to be followed for renewal of prospecting licence or for conversion of prospecting licence into mining licence. On 16.03.2016, the State Government through G.O.Ms.No.15 Industries and Commerce (Min-I) Department, clarified that Quartz & Feldspar and 29 other minerals (which were declared as minor minerals by the Central Government on 10.02.2015) were regulated by Rule 12(5) of TSMMC Rules, 1966. As per Rule 12(5) of TSMMC Rules, if a prospecting licence holder wanted to get mining lease on the basis of prospecting licence, the application for mining lease should be filed within three months from the date of expiry of prospecting licence to claim preferential right over other applicants. On 21.04.2016, the petitioner filed mining lease application on the basis of prospecting licence granted to him earlier. As his mining lease application remained undisposed, he filed WP No.36296 of 2016 before this Court challenging the inaction of the 3rd respondent and the same was disposed of vide order dated 10.11.2016 directing the 3rd respondent to consider the applications dated 22.12.2015 and 08.02.2016 for renewal of prospecting licence and the application submitted on 21.04.2016 for grant of mining lease as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the said order.
Dr.GRR,J 3 WP No.26300 of 2022
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the 3rd respondent issued show cause notice dated 10.11.2021 to the petitioner as to why action should not be taken for rejection of his quarry lease application dated 21.04.2016 on the basis of the proposals of the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Nagarkurnool, referred in the said show cause notice. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 18.11.2021 and requested the 3rd respondent to withdraw further proceedings and also requested to furnish a copy of the proposals of the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology referred in the show cause notice to enable the petitioner to submit a comprehensive reply. Without furnishing the order of the proposals of Assistant Director of Mines and Geology on the basis of which the show cause notice dated 10.11.2021 was issued, the 3rd respondent passed an order dated 25.01.2022 rejecting the quarry lease application of the petitioner on the ground that the same was not filed within three months from the date of expiry of the prospecting licence as stipulated under Rule 12(5)(b) of the TSMMC Rules, 1966. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed a statutory revision before the 2nd respondent under Rule 35-A of TSMMC Rules on 10.02.2022 along with a stay petition seeking stay of further proceedings pending disposal of the revision petition. Though the revision was filed as long back as on Dr.GRR,J 4 WP No.26300 of 2022 10.02.2022, the 2nd respondent did not grant stay of further proceedings, the 3rd respondent was processing other quarry lease applications ignoring the preferential right of the petitioner over other applications causing serious prejudice to the petitioner and prayed to allow the petition.
5. Learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology submitted that the application of the petitioner was rejected as it was not filed within three months period from the date of expiry of the prospecting licence as per Rule 12(5) of TSMMC Rules 1966 and prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. However, considering that the petitioner had filed a statutory revision before the 2nd respondent under Rule 35-A of the Telanagana State Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 aggrieved by the rejection order of the 3rd respondent dated 25.01.2022 along with stay petition and the said petition was not disposed of by the 2nd respondent since then, it is considered fit to direct the 2nd respondent to dispose of the revision petition within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and to direct the 3rd respondent not to take further steps to grant quarry lease in favour of third parties till the disposal of the revision petition by the 2nd respondent.
Dr.GRR,J 5 WP No.26300 of 2022
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. There shall be no order as to costs.
The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________ Dr. G. RADHA RANI, J June 21, 2022 KTL