SIRI SAND COMPANY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these writ petitions arise out of a common context and also seek identical relief. Hence, they are heard together and are decided now by this common judgment.

(2.) ALL the petitioners submitted representations to the State Government for granting necessary transit permits for transportation of Minor Mineral ordinary sand, which is stocked at the respective stock yards held by the petitioners. The petitioners grievance is that the State Government has not been passing any order granting transit permits and hence these writ petitions.

(3.) ORDINARY sand is a Minor Mineral in terms of the definition contained in Section 3(e) of the Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. In terms of the Section 15 of the said Act, Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules 1966 have been framed, referred to henceforth as Rules. All the petitioners have been granted leasehold rights at one point of time or the other for quarrying the said Minor Mineral. However, after the expiry of the leasehold rights the petitioners have approached the State Government and sought for extension of the leasehold rights for quarrying/excavating sand from the earlier leased out areas. The State Government passed orders on 21.12.2013 extending the lease period for six months to enable the petitioners to excavate the balance quantity of sand. These extension orders of the State Government are the subject matter of challenge in a batch of writ petitions bearing No. 39265 of 2013 and batch, which were decided by me on 11.04.2014. It would be appropriate to notice that the previous lessees/quarry lease holders as well the State Government have proceeded on the premise that lessees deserve extension for, they were prevented for certain reasons beyond their control from extracting the permitted quantity of sand and hence instead of entertaining any claims for refund of proportionate money, it would be equitable to grant extension of lease period.