APHC010644832025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 34026/2025 Between: 1. RAI BHADUR SETH SHREERAM DURGAPRASAD AND FATECHAND NARASINGDAS (R B S S D AND F N DAS), REP BY ITS PARTNER, MANAVEDAR MOR S/O. VISHNU KUMAR AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O. GARIVIDI RAJAM MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DIRECTORATE, MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPT., IBRAHIMPATNAM,VIJAYAWADA, A.P. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPT, O/O.DIRECTOR MINES AND GEOLOGY, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT 4. THE ASST DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPT, O/O,DIRECTOR MINES AND GEOLOGY, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents failure to take 2 action on representations submitted by the petitioners to extend the lease for the gap period of 2 years 19 days taken by the respondents to execute the lease agreement dt. 21-04-2022 to excavate the manganese in contrary Sec 8(A) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation)Act, 1957 also contrary to rule 31 of Mineral Concession Rules 1960 and consequently direct the respondents to execute a fresh lease agreement for the gap period 2 years 19 days taken by the respondents for execution lease agreement dated 21-04-2022 and to pass orders. IA 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 the respondents to execute the lease agreement for the gap period 2 years 19 days taken by the respondent for executing Mining lease on consideration of representation of petitioner dt. 24-7-2023, 07-05-2024, 03.07.2024 in terms of the Sec 8(A) of Mines and Minerals (Development approving and Regulation) Act 1957 also as per the Rule 31 of Mineral Concession Rules 1960 the mining clamp and other permission pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. DEVI PRASAD MANGALAPURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY 3 The Court made the following order: Heard Sri N.Subbarao, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Devi Prasad Mangalapuri, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology. 2. The instant writ petition is filed challenging the action of the respondents in not extending the lease period in respect of gap period as per the provisions of Section 8A of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. 3. It is contended that the petitioner had applied for grant of mining lease for manganese ore over an extent of 13.868 Hectors in Survey No.124/P Avagudem village of Gariveedu Mandal, Vizianagaram District. In pursuance thereof G.O.Ms.No.1497 dated 16.11.1965 was issued by the Government granting mining lease for a period of 20 years and lease deed was also executed on 08.03.1968 granting lease upto 07.03.1988. 4. Subsequently, on request of the Steel Plant Authority of India Limited (SAIL) the Manganese bearing areas in Srikakulam and Vizianagaram District were reserved in favour of SAIL vide proceedings in G.O.Ms.No.5,Industries & Commerce Department dated 05-01-1978. On account of the same after lapse of 20 years the 1st renewal application filed by the petitioner could not be processed. However, the Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant vide its letter dated 28.03.1991 informed the Government that they would not be requiring the land reserved in their favour anymore. Accordingly, lease was renewed in favour of 4 petitioner vide G.O.Ms.No.255 dated 29.07.1993 for a period of ten years. In pursuance thereof lease was executed on 07.12.1995. It is contended that, lease was in force upto 07.03.1998. After the said extension, the lease was extended by 20 years. In the meanwhile, the provisions of Section 8A of MMDR Act, 1957 were amended. By virtue of the said amendment mining leases granted before the said amendment shall be deemed to have been granted for a period of 50 years. It is contended that, in the light of the said amendment the lease in favour of the petitioners is deemed to be in force upto 06.12.2025. It is contended that at the relevant point of time when the request made by SAIL was pending, the lease in favour of the petitioner was not considered between 08.03.1968 to 06.12.1995. The said period of 7 years 273 days i.e., 08.03.1988 to 06.12.1995, was excluded while issuing the extension of lease. 5. It is contended that after the extension of lease vide G.O.Ms.No.83 dated 08.12.2021 extending the lease upto 06.12.2025, the petitioner could not commence the mining operations immediately since the statutory clearances were not obtained. Thus stated that in the process of obtaining the same it did not carry out any mining operations for a period of 2 years 19 days. Thus, the petitioner has requested for compensating the said loss by proportionate extension of the lease after 06.12.2025. The said representation was preceded by similar representations dated 24.07.2023 and 03.07.2024. As the said representations were not considered. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of the instant writ petition. 5 6. When the matter has been taken up for consideration, the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology has placed before the Court written instructions received in the case. A perusal of the same would reflect that, the 4th respondent issued proceedings dated 21.04.2022 extending the lease period for a period of 50 years i.e., from 08.03.1968 to 07.03.1988 and 07.12.1995 to 06.12.2025 excluding the gap period. It is further contended by the respondents that as per the provisions of Section 8A (6) of MMDR Act, the lease is granted for a period of 50 years from the date of initial grant. It is further contended that the request of the petitioner that for grant of lease in respect of the alleged gap period of 2 years 19 days is on account of the fact that there was delay in obtaining statutory clearances and approvals from the Indian Bureau of Mines and A.P. Pollution Control Board. It is stated by the respondents that obtaining the necessary statutory clearances and compliances are the sole responsibility of the petitioner and there cannot be any direction for extension of this as for by the petitioner on the said pretext. 7. Having regard to the contentions, this Court is of the view that the application filed by the petitioner for extension of the lease is pending for consideration before the respondents. This court deems it appropriate. Disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders and representation of the petitioner dated 24.07.2023, 07.05.2024 and 03.07.2024 within a period of eight (08) 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the order. Till passing of such order, the respondent shall not take any measures for allotting the subject land in favour of third parties. After giving opportunity to the petitioner in terms of the provisions of Section 8A r/w 31(2) of the MMDR Act and Rules. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 30.12.2025 RMR 7 25 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 34026 OF 2025 Date: 30.12.2025 RMR