SANJANA GRANITES Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology.

(2.) Apart from the other legal issues raised, learned counsel for the petitioner points out that to the show cause notice dated 28.07.2020, a detailed reply has been given on 10.08.2020. However, he points out that in the impugned order dated 18.08.2020, in the penultimate paragraph, it is stated that the reply is not satisfactory. However, it is not mentioned why the reply is not satisfactory. According to him the rules of natural justice mandate that any orders having civil consequences, the reasons should be furnished in order to enable the party to appreciate why his case has been rejected. Relying on two judgments in Writ Appeal No.1291 of 2006 and W.P.No.20404 of 2019, which is reported in Ch. Rama Krishna and another v State of Andhra Pradesh,2020 3 ALT 288 (SB) ,learned counsel argues that reasons are necessary to be furnished and the failure to furnish the reasons would amount to violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, he states that on this short limited ground itself the orders should be set aside.

(3.) In reply to this, learned GovernmentPleader argues that the petitioner was given an opportunity and the order was passed only after the show cause notice was given and the reply was considered. He also points out that an interim reply has also been given. Therefore, learned Government Pleader argues that the rules of natural justice are followed and that there is no need for further order in this case.