APHC010356022025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 18402 OF 2025 Between: Sri Y Ravi Kumar, S/o Sri Y. Nagamuni, Aged R/o.H.No. 13/86, Vadlapalem (V), Tadipatri Town, Ananthapuram District, A.P. ...Petitioner about 45 Years, AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary Mines and Geology Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi 2. The Chairman and Director Mines and Geology Department Ibrahimpatnam, Vijayawada, Krishna District, A.P. 3. The District Mines Officer, O/o. Mines and Geology, Nandyal 4. The Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Officer, Kurnool A.P A.P. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to pass an order or orders or direction more particularly nature of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring that the Respondent herein in dt.23.06.2025, dt.08.05.2025 submitted to the NO.1804/QL/2008, dt.30.04.2024. may one in the action of the 3rd issuing demand notice vide No.1804/QL/2008 without considering the Petitioner’s representation show-cause notice issued vide No. without according any opportunity to the % Petitioner herein, as wholly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to principles df Natural Justice, besides being violative of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of COnsiitution of India and consequently set-aside the impugned Demand \ Notice issued vide N0.1804/QL/2008 dt.23.06.2025, directing the 3rd Respondent herein to consider the Petitioners representation dt.08.05.2025 to the show-cause notice dt.30.04.2024 issued vide No.1804/QL/2008 by according an opportunity to the Petitioner herein. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to STAY the operation of the impugned demand NO.1804/QL/2008 dt.23.06.2025 issued by the 3rd Respondent, during the pendency of the writ petition. notice vide Counsel for the Petitioner: M/S. CKR ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY The Court made the following order: APHC010356022025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 18402/2025 Between: 1.Y RAVI KUMAR, S/0 SRI Y. NAGAMUNI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS VADLAPALEM R/O.H.NO.13/86, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, A.P. (V) TADIPATRI TOWN ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI 2.THE CHAIRMAN AND DIRECTOR, MINES AND IBRAHIMPATNAM, VIJAYAWADA, GEOLOGY KRISHNA DEPARTMENT DISTRICT, A.P. 3.THE DISTRICT MINES OFFICER, 0/0. MINES AND GEOLOGY, NANDYAL, A.P. 4.THE REGIONAL VIGILANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, KURNOOL, A.P ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.CKR ASSOCIATES 2 $ f Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 2.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY The Court made the following: ORDER: Heard Sri N. Sai Phanindra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Sudeepthi Potiuri, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for the respondents. 2. The Writ Petition is filed challenging the proceedings of the S'"* respondent dated 23-06-2025 raising demand without considering the explanation of the petitioner. 3. It is contended that the petitioner was granted quarry lease vide proceedings, dated 10.11.2007. The petitioner filed renewal application 12.07.2017 seeking renewal of the quarry lease. It is contended that the on respondents conducted inspection at the quarry lease area, without informing the petitioner. On the basis of the inspection, the respondents have arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner has excavated over and above the permissible limits within leased area and outside the lease area. Pursuant to the said inspection show cause notice dated 3-04-2024 was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner has submitted an explanation dated 8-05-2025 seeking certain documents on the basis of which the show cause notice was issued. However, without furnishing the same, basing on the alleged discrepancies 3 found during the inspection, the respondents raised demand imposing liability of Rs.4,34,69,099/- towards normal seigniorage fee, penalty and DMF. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the explanation filed by the petitioner to the show cause notice was not considered. It is further argued that the joint inspection report was not furnished to the petitioner and without furnishing the said report considering the representation of the petitioner to the show cause notice, the impugned proceedings were passed. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that 5. vide the explanation, dated 08.05.2025, the petitioner has pointed certain deficiencies in the show cause notice and requested for furnishing of certain document(s). Without referring to the submissions made, the impugned order has been passed stating that the explanation submitted by the petitioner is untenable. The learned counsel thus prays for set aside of the impugned proceedings as the impugned order is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and suffers from non application of mind. Perused the record. The petitioner, in response to the show 6. cause notice, has requested documents, such as the report of the joint inspection conducted when the petitioner was not physically present at the quarry area, to submit a detailed explanation. From the said observation of the respondent that, the explanation submitted by the petitioner is not tenable, it can safely be said that the authority not only failed to furnish the report sought by the petitioner but also failed to look into the explanation of the petitioner. 4 Had he looked into it, he would have observed whether the petitioner's request for furnishing the inspection report is justifiable or not. Thus, the impugned order not only suffers from a violation of principles of natural justice but also suffers from non-application of the mind by the authority, rendering the demand raised unsustainable. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of, setting aside the impugned order, dated 23.06.2025, and remanding the matter to the 3'^^ respondent. The respondent No.3 is directed to furnish copies of the documents that have been asked for, by the petitioner, vide explanation dated 08.05.2025. The said documents/reports shall be furnished to the petitioner within a period of one (01) week from the date of receipt of the order, and the petitioner shall submit his explanation within two (02) weeks thereafter. After submission of the explanation by the petitioner, the respondent No.3 is directed to pass appropriate orders on the show cause notice within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of the explanation of the petitioner. 7. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. Sd/- B.CHITTI JOSEPH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// S N OFFICER To. 1. The Principal Secretary, Mines Velagapudi, Amaravathi 2. The Chairman and Geology Department, Secretariat, and Director, Mines . Ibrahimpatnam, Vijayawada, Krishna District and Geology Department A.P. 3. The District Mines Officer, O/o. Mines and Geology, Nandyal, A.P. 4. The Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Officer, Kurnool, A.P 5. One CC to M/s.CKR Associates, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for General Administration, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CCs to GP for Mines and Geology, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies TF HIGH COURT DATED:28/07/2025 I 19 AUG 2(125 ^ Current Seciioi) -^ ORDER WP NO. 18402 OF 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS