N. SRINIVASA REDDY Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ravi Kondaveeti, learned Senior counsel who argued on behalf of Mr.Kirthi Teja Kondaveeti, learned counsel on record for the Writ Petitioner, Smt.S.Premalatha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Industries & Mines, who is representing Respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri L.Sameer Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests, who is representing Respondent No.5.

(2.) This Writ Petition is filed seeking the Court to issue an order, more particularly, in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Rc.No.111/2023/A2(ii), dtd. 17/5/2023, that were issued by the 5th respondent directing the 4th respondent to stop issuance of transport permits to the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to declare that the petitioner is entitled for getting dispatch permits.

(3.) Making his submission with regard to the merits of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was granted quarry lease over an extent of 2 Hectares of land which is located in Sy.No.82 of Gowraram Village. The said lease was granted in consultation with the Department of Mines and Geology and also the Forest Department. Learned counsel also states that subsequently, the petitioner submitted an application for renewal of the quarry lease. The said application was referred to the Tahsildar for issuance of No Objection Certificate and the Tahsildar issued No Objection Certificate. Learned counsel submits that the lease was renewed for a further period of twenty years and thus, the petitioner was carrying out the activities. However, a notice was issued to the petitioner calling upon his explanation as to why action should not be taken against him for violating the provisions of the Telangana Forest Act 1967. The petitioner was directed to vacate the land immediately. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner submitted his reply giving details of the lease that was granted in his favour. Learned counsel states that the 5th respondent, thereafter, through the impugned proceedings, directed the 4th respondent not to issue any transport permits for metal quarried till completion of joint survey. Learned counsel states that joint survey has to be conducted by the Forest Department in coordination with the Revenue Department and the petitioner has nothing to do with it and therefore, the petitioner cannot be put to loss by non-issuance of transport permits of metal quarried.