A M ARUNACHALAM Vs. STATE OF AP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent.

(2.) This writ petition is filed questioning the order of the 1st respondent in the revision application filed by the 4th respondent dtd. 29/3/2023 allowing the revision application by dismissing the claim of the petitioner.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the outset, the impugned memo dtd. 29/3/2023 of the 1st respondent is contrary to the Rule 35 (A) of Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 and as the revision was filed by the 4th respondent with abnormal delay, the same was not condoned by showing the sufficient reason in the impugned revisional order and as such it is defective and not sustainable under law. Initially, the petitioner was given Letter of Intent in the matter of grant of quarry lease for Black Granite over an extent 3.000 Hectares in Sy.No.885 of Kanipakam Village, Irala Mandal, Chittoor District by the 2nd respondent. The said Letter of Intent was extended first time in favour of the petitioner vide proceedings of the 2nd respondent dtd. 29/12/2020 and the similar extension was made by the 2nd respondent in favour of the petitioner vide proceedings dtd. 11/1/2022. The Form-"P" application submitted by the petitioner dtd. 20/1/2012 discloses at the Column of the name of the applicant as Sri A.M. Arunachalam represented by Jalakam Murali, Managing Director M/s. TAM Granites & Marbles Private Limited.