ORDER :

1. The writ petitioner prays for a mandamus declaring the action of respondents in rejecting the quarry lease application of the petitioner for Black Granite mineral over an extent of 4.00 Hectares in Sy.Nos.38/1A, 1B, 1C, 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, 2’O’ of Murikipudi Village, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Guntur District vide proceedings No.845/D7/2021 dated 07.04.2021 and consequently proposing to grant quarry lease in favour of 4th respondent vide proceedings No.6669/D7/2021 dated 28.04.2021 to the extent of 2.440 Hectares in Sy.Nos.38/1A, 1B, 2A, 2B and 38/2C of Murikipudi Village, Chilakaluripeta Mandal, Guntur District as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Rule 12 of the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 (for short, ‘the APMMC Rules, 1966’) and for such other orders.

2. The petitioner’s case succinctly is thus:

(a) On 23.04.2016, the petitioner made an application for lease of black granite over an extent of 4.00 Hectares in the area as stated supra to the 3rd respondent by paying prescribed application fee. The 3rd respondent referred his application to the Tahsildar, Chilakaluripeta for issuing NOC and the Tahsildar sought opinion of the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Guntur since the applied area was classified as ‘Vaagu’ and hence, whether the said land was suitable for quarrying and NOC can be issued. The Executive Engineer vide letter No.EE/ID/GNT/DB/TO/734 dated 05.02.2018 opined that the land was suitable for grant of quarry lease and NOC can be issued. Accordingly, the Tahsildar, Chilakaluripeta issued NOC vide Lr.No.RC.No.562/2017-A dated 03.03.2018. For a period of two years nothing transpired thereafter.

(b) While so, a joint inspection and survey over applied area was held on 17.12.2020. It was made known that that an extent of Ac.7.61 cents was feasible for quarrying operations and the said area was demarcated and boundaries were fixed. Thereafter, for some time no further progress was made in the matter. The petitioner made requests on 02.02.2021 and 10.02.2021 to the respondents to process his application at the earliest since his application was the earliest one. He received letter No.375/RTI/2021 dated 16.02.2021 informing that as per the list of applications submitted over the subject area, the petitioner’s application was at Sl.No.5 and all the applications received earlier to his application were rejected and the petitioner’s application was also recommended for rejection and the application dated 11.08.2020 submitted by 4th respondent was recommended to be considered for grant of mining lease. The 4th respondent application was received 3 years 100 days later to the application of petitioner, but same was proposed to be considered by overlooking the priority of the petitioner’s application.

(c) Following said information, the 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice No.854/D7/2021 dated 17.02.2021 to the petitioner calling upon his explanation for not paying the enhanced application fee, deposit-amount and also regarding his submission of defective sketch. The petitioner submitted detailed explanation dated 03.03.2021 stating that the enhanced application fees was claimed under G.O.Ms.No.56, Industries & Commerce (MII) Department dated 30.04.2016 which is prospective in operation but not retrospective in effect and since applications were received prior to the date of said G.O., enhanced application fee need not be paid. Regarding the allegations as to the wrong sketch, he stated that the sketch enclosed was a correct one because the Tahsildar, Chilakaluripeta identified the applied area on ground with reference to the sketch submitted by him and the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department has also issued NOC for grant of quarry lease of black granite based on the said sketch. Thus, submitting the explanation the petitioner as an abundant caution has paid the differential application fee vide challan dated 03.03.2021 and enclosed to his explanation. A re-draw