B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THESE three writ petitions may be disposed of by a common order, as they are inter-related and the subject matter that arises for consideration is one and the same

( 2 ) THE petitioner in W. P. No. 9710 of 1992 obtained a quarry lease for Road Metal and building stone over an extent of 1. 00 hectare in Sy. No. 4 of Pokeru village, bheemunipatnam Taluk, Visakhapatnam district for a period of five years under proceedings dated 24-9-1985 from the Asst. Director of Mines and Geology, visakhapatnam. The lease deed was executed on 21-12-1985 for a period of five years and valid upto 20-12-1990. The Asst. Director by an order dated 24-9-1990 rejected the request of the petitioner for grant of renewal on the ground that the petitioner was in arrears of Rs. 20,017/- payable to the Government. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Director of Mines and Geology. The Director by an order dated 20-2-1991 rejected the appeal.

( 3 ) THEREAFTER the petitioner claims to have filed an appeal to the Principal secretary on 5-3-1991. The order passed by the appellate authority was confirmed by the Government on 13-11-1991 and communicated the same to the petitioner. The order rightly refers to the so called appeal preferred by the petitioner as a revision for the simple reason that no further appeal lies to the Government under the Rules against the order passed by the appellate authority,

( 4 ) IT appears, thereafter, the petitioner filed some representation on 28-11-1991 addressed to the Minister for Mines and geology. The Minister not only entertained the said representation, but passed an order setting aside the order passed by the government on 13-11-1991 and directed the director of Mines and Geology to grant renewal of quarry lease for road metal in sy. No. 4 of Pokeru village, Anandapuram mandal of Visakhapatnam to the petitioner subject to the conditions that he should remit mineral revenue to a tune of rs. 20,000/- due to the Government before execution of lease deed.

( 5 ) IN the meanwhile, the Asst. Director of mines and Geology submitted proposal for grant of quarry lease in favour of one m. Surya Rao (writ petitioner in W. P. No. 13418/1992 and impleaded as respondent No. 5 in W. P. No. 9710/92), as the area was free for grant. The Deputy director, having considered the request of the 5th respondent in W. P. No. 9710/1992 granted lease on 22-12-1991 over an extent of 1. 00 Hectare in Sy. No. 4 for a period of five years. The lease deed was also executed in favour of the said M. Surya Rao on 27-12-1991. The said Surya Rao started working in the said quarry from 27-12-1991 onwards.

( 6 ) THE Writ Petition No. 9710/1992 has been filed seeking Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not complying with the orders of the government of Andhra Pradesh in proceedings dated 19-12-1992 (sic. 19-2-1992) directing renewal of lease in favour of the petitioner therein. The petitioner also obtained an interim order on 11-8-1992 directing the Director and otha authorities to implement the order passed by the Government dated 19-2-1992. The deputy Director of Mines and Geology visakhapatnam perhaps with a view to implement the directions of this Court issued show-cause notice dated 16-9-1992 to the said Surya Rao directing him to show cause as to why the lease earlier granted to him on 27-12-1991 should not be cancelled the said Surya Rao accordingly submitted his reply, inter alia contending that the quarry lease cannot be cancelled by the deputy Director, inasmuch as there was no legal impediment for granting the lease at on the date when it was granted to him however, by an order dated 13-10-1992 the deputy Director cancelled the lease granted to the said Surya Rao on 27-12-1991. The said Surya Rao filed W. P. No. 13418/1992 challenging the said order of cancellation. This Court by an order dated 16-10-1992 passed an interim order suspending the order of cancellation of lease. The said order has bee

Click Here to Read the rest of this document