Point of Law: Purpose of NOC is to find out if the Government have any claim over the land over which the lease is sought for or if there are any dues to the Government in respect of the land over which the lease is sought.

ORDER :

The challenge in this writ petition is to the revision order vide Memo No3248/M.I(1)/2020 dated 16.11.2020 passed by 1st respondent whereby and whereunder while dismissing the revision application, the rejection order vide proceedings No.16199/R5-1/2013 dated 16.07.2016 passed by the Director of Mines & Geology / 2nd respondent on the petitioner’s lease application was confirmed.

2. The petitioner’s case is thus:

(a) The petitioner applied for quarry lease for colour granite over an extent of 4.5 hectares in Sy.No.6 situated in Eswarapuram Village, Puttur Mandal, Chittoor District through a mining lease application dated 07.09.2010. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology/4th respondent forwarded his application to the Tahsildar, Puttur Mandal/5th respondent on the same day for issuing NOC/Feasibility report. In spite of petitioner’s several requests the report was not submitted. Hence, the petitioner filed W.P.No.1148/2011 before the High Court of A.P. seeking a direction to 5th respondent. The said writ petition was allowed on 28.01.2011 with a direction to 5th respondent herein to send his report/recommendations in the matter directly to 4th respondent herein as envisaged in G.O.Ms.No.181 dated 28.05.1998 as expeditiously as possible. The further case of the petitioner is that after the above order the petitioner made several representations to 5th respondent but of no avail.

(b) While so, in the meanwhile the 4th respondent instructed the petitioner to attend the inspection of the applied leased area and accordingly, on 25.03.2011 the petitioner met Surveyor and Inspecting Officer, who visited the area applied by the petitioner and conducted survey and inspection and instructed the petitioner to submit an affidavit of consent after issuance of NOC/report by 5th respondent. Subsequently also the petitioner made request to 5th respondent but he did not send the NOC.

(c) While so, the petitioner received show cause notice No.16199/R5-1/2013 dated 27.04.2013 sent by the Joint Director of Mines & Geology, A.P. stating as to why his quarry lease application shall not be rejected since the Tahsildar, Puttur Mandal was not inclined to issue NOC in his favour even after lapse of 28 months. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 03.06.2013 narrating therein that there was no fault on his part and the 5th respondent has not so far issued NOC on one or other ground and requested to recall the show cause notice.

(d) Thereafter the petitioner was waiting with the hope that after receiving report his quarry lease application would be processed. Having so waited, on 16.10.2018 he approached authorities to know about the status of his application but to his surprise the 4th respondent informed him that his lease application was already rejected by the 2nd respondent / Director of Mines & Geology in the year 2016 itself vide proceedings No.16199/R5-1/2013 dated 16.07.2016. Though he was informed that the copy of the proceedings were sent to the petitioner, but the petitioner did not receive. Hence, the petitioner obtained copy of the order of 2nd respondent through RTI application. On perusing the said order, the petitioner came to know that Director of Mines & Geology rejected his quarry lease application with observation as if the petitioner did not submit reply to the show cause notice which is factually incorrect, as the petitioner has submitted his reply on 03.06.2013 itself. Without considering the petitioner’s reply, the Director of Mines & Geology (2nd respondent) has unduly rejected his quarry lease application. Therefore, the petitioner filed revision before 1st respondent on 09.01.2019 challenging the order of 2nd respondent. However, the said revision petition was dismissed on 16.11.2020 without considering the contentions raised by the petitioner. It was not a speaking order. Hence, the writ petition challenging th