IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:;AMARAVAT^ (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 2895 OF 2025 Of / o Between: 1. Kimudu Siva Lakshmi, D/o. Late Bodakonda Padal, Aged 43 years, Occ Sarabavaram Village, Rolugunta Mandal, Anakapalli Ki'^LJdu halu Dora, Aged 18 years, Qcc Distr^t^^ Sarabavaram Village, Rolugunta Mandal, Anakapialli Aged 60 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o Sarabavaram Village, Rolugunta Mandal, Anakapalli District. 4. Kimudu Varahalu Dora, S/o. Late k Godanna Dora, Aged 43 years Occ District^^^’ Sarabavaram Village, Rolugunta Mandal, Anakapalli ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Government, Department of Mines And Geology ^ Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat Amaravathi, Guntur District. 3. State of Andhra Pradesh, ^ Rep. by The Principal Secretary Government, Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat Amaravathi, Guntur District. AnaCpa“[. AnaV°ap“^^ Department, ®' AnlkapaK'nalpL^rofsWrt^'"®''' Department, to Secretariat, to Velagapudi to Velagapudi, 8. Environmental Engineer A Anakapalli District. P. Pollution Control Board, Anakapalli, 9. The District Coliector, Panchayat Wing, Anakapaili District at Anakapaiii 10. The Revenue Divisional Officer. Anakapalli, Anakapalli District, 11. The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Anakapalli 12. The Tahsildar, Rolugunta Mandal 14. The Station House Officer Anakapalli District. , Anakapalli District. Anakapalli District. Rolugunta Police Station, Rolugunta, 15. Boppana Global Civil Constructions Pwt i tri k Director, B.G.Chowdarv O/o D Mn '« 9 o«Q/Qn Managing Hills, Hyderabad Telangana State. ^'^-^eS/QO-QI, Road No.2, Sahara ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS Respondents No 1 to 14 i of India praying that J, the High Court may in more particularly one in the declaring the inaction on the part of in preventing the illegal and indiscriminate mining activity being carried out by Respondents of gravel and black stones No 15 large scale and excavation in the total land of the Hill Area of an extent of 8 hectors covered by Sy.Nos.21/1 o of Sarabavaram Panchayat Rajannapeta Revenue Village, Rolugunta deploying heavy excavators. Mandal, Anakapalli District by 3od transporting the material to far off places thereby causing damage and substantial loss to the agricultural lands, live Exchequer besides adversely effectinq ecological balance and destroying natural resources, under the Quarry Lease Granted by 6th Respondent for despite the detailed stock and to the Government guise of an extent of 8 Hectors thereof, representation and Petition dated 02.01.2025 submitted by the petitioners and villagers, duly reporting the facts and circumstances ■n detail, as illegal, Irregular, irrational and violative of provisions of Mining % Regulation Act and rules and regulations framed there Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Health Act, 1939 Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and offends Articles under, Andhi^a Public 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 14 to prevent the respondents No 15 from to carrying out illegal and unauthorized mining activity and excavation of Red Soil and Gravel from thl aforesaid lands, by cancelling the lease granted by 6thRespondent in favour of Respondent No 15 lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 direct Respondents Nds: 2 to 14 to initiate necessary action on the complaint dt. 02.01.2025 submitted by the Petitioners and villagers seeking to prevent the illegal and unauthorized mining and excavation of gravel and black stones in the total land of the Hill Area of an extent of 8 hectors covered by Sy.Nos.21/1 & 91 of Sarabavaram Panchayat, Rajannapeta Revenue Village, Rolugunta Mandal, Anakapalli District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI NANI BABU ROBBA Counsel for the Respondents No.1, 4, 5, 6: GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY Counsel for the Respondents No.2, 9,10,12: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.3, 11: GP FOR PANCHAYAT Counsel for the Respondent No,,14: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents No.7, 8: SRI YELISETTI SOMARAJU Counsel for the Respondent No.13: SRI YARRAGUNTLA KOTESWARA RAO The Court made the following: Order APHC010053342025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] r I j: TUESDAY ,THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 2895/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER(S) Kimudu Siva Lakshmi and Others AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.NANI BABU ROBBA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2.GP FOR HOME 3.GP FOR REVENUE 4.YELISETTI SOMARAJU STANDING COUNSEL APPCB 5.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY The Court made the following: ORDER: Heard Sri Nani Babu Robba, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Sudeepthi Potiuri, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and 2 Geology, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, Sri Yeli Somaraju, learned Standing Counsel for APPCB for the respondents. setti The writ petition is filed challenging the inaction of respondent Nos.1 to 14 in conducting indiscriminate mining activity by respondent No. 15 by engaging in large scale excavation of gravel and black stones in the total land of the Hill area of an extent of 8 hectares covered in Sy.Nos.21/1 & 91 of Sarbavaram Panchayat, Rajannapeta Revenue Village, Rolugunta Mandal, Anakapalli District, by using heavy excavators and transportation of the minerals thus exctracted. 2. 3. The contention of the petitioners is that they are the residents of Sarbavaram Panchayat, Rajannapeta Revenue Village, Rolugunta Mandal i and the said illegal mining activity carried out by the 15*^ respondent has been causing destruction to the surrounding agricultural lands. The mining activity is resulting in severe air, water and noise pollution endangering the health of the residents and the livestock. The blasting operation that has been carried out during night time also caused structural damage to the houses. The mining operations have led deforestation disturbing the ecobalance. When the matter is taken up for Admission today, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for APPCB has placed a copy of instructions received by him in the case. A perusal of the same would reflect that the 4. Pollution Control Board has not issued any permission to carry out mining operations to the unofficial respondent. However, the Pollution Control Board 3 y has issued CTE and CTO to carry out excavation of road metal and building stone in the name of Sri Y. Veerraju in Sy.No.216 (New Sy.No.231, 232) Sarbhavaram, Rolugunta, Anakapalli District. Pursuant to the complaint of the petitioner, Pollution Control Board officials inspected the area on 19.03.2025 and found that the said Veerraju has been operating a mine after duly obtaining the necessary environmental clearance from SEIAA, Government of Andhra Pradesh., for Mining of Road Metal & Building Stone of 71,640 Cum/Annum which is valid for a period of 20 years. At the time when the inspection was conducted, the mine was not in operation, and two porcelains were at the site. It is further stated that the said Veerraju has deployed a tractor for sprinkling water on the ground to prevent dust from becoming airborne and further stated that they have never conducted the blasting operations at night and as per the instructions of Village President, the blasting operation was carried out twice in a week during the daytime between 01:00 PM to 02:00 PM and it is further noted from the instructions that the lease holder has laid a separate road through agricultural fields to prevent vehicle movement through the Rajannapeta Village. The said instructions of the Pollution Control Board dated 5. 19.03.2025 received by the learned Standing Counsel are placed on record. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology 6. has submitted a copy of instructions received by her in the case. A perusal of the same would reflect that the quarry license was granted in favour of one Yaka Veerraju and the Divisional Mines and Geology Officer, Narsipatnam 4 has executed the lease deed vide proceedings, dated 15.05.2024 and tie lease will be in force upto 14.05.2034. It is stated that the lease holder IS having all statutory permissions i.e., Approved Mining Plan, Environment Clearance, Consent for Establishment and Consent for the concerned authorities. Operations issued by Pursuant to the complaint made by one Sri ik. Rama Naidu and Sri Tolla Ravi Kumar, the officiais of Mines Department ha\« inspected and directed the iease hoider to abide by the conditions of the license and in that regard a report was also submitted to the Collector Thereafter, on 06.03.2025, the Technical staff of the Department have once again made inspection and found that the subject Rajannapeta Village located at a distance of 650 Meters from the quarry lease area. It is further stated that the lease holder has also made arrangements to sprinkle the roads to avoid air pollution. IS water on And that he has also entered into agreement with a licensed person for conducting blasting operations enquiring with the lease holder, it has stated that that he had never conducted any blasting operation during night hours. an , on 7. The said instructions received by the learned Assistant Government Pleader are placed on record. 8. Having regard to the contentions advanced, the contention of the petitioner that the 15th respondent has conducted illegal mining in the subject is misconceived, and unfounded. This court is thus not inclined to interfere in the matter. area 5 9. However the petitioner is at liberty if he has got any grievance against granting of mining licenses to work out his remedies under law, if advised. 10. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. SD/- V.DIWAKAR deputy registrar //TRUE COPY// ['^1 To, SECTION OFFICER 1. One CC to SRI NANI BABU ROBBA Advocate [O 2. Two CCs to GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 3. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] ^ [OUT]^ PANCHAYAT, High Court of Andhra Pradesh 5. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. One CC to SRI YELISETI SOMARAJU, Standing Counsel [OPUC] 7. One CC to SRI YARRAGUNTLA KOTESWARA RAO, Standing Counsel for ZPP, MPP, Gram Panchayat [OPUC] 8. Three CD Copies gsg % HIGH COURT DATED: 01/04/2025 ORDER Cj WP.No.2895 of 2025 t 2 6 SEP 2025 mi DISMISSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS