ORDER :

Subba Reddy Satti, J.

This Writ Petition is filed to declare the Memo No.1665046/M.I(1)/2022 dated 16.12.2022 issued by the 1st respondent, partly modifying the Demand Notice No.1652/D13- 2/2021 dated 11.02.2022, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. a) In the affidavit, it was contended that the petitioner was granted quarry lease for Grey Granite for a period of five years from 05.01.1984 to 04.01.1989. Thereafter the Director of Mines & Geology, granted renewal for a period of 5 years from 05.01.1989 to 04.01.1994. The Director of Mines & Geology granted fresh quarry lease over an extent of Ac.8.50 cents in S.No.10 at Kanamanapalli village, Gudupalli Mandal, Chittoor District for a period of 15 years by proceedings No.23023/K2/94 dated 16.10.1994. The lease was extended from 14.12.2009 to 13.12.2029. While extending the lease, the extent was reduced from 3.441 hectares to 2.024 hectares.

b) The Joint Director of Mines & Geology through Lr.No.4552/M4/PLMR/2008 dated 30.06.2009 approved the mining plan. As per the approved plan, the probable recovery of salable granite blocks by the lessee was fixed @15% of total material extracted. Petitioner got environmental clearance certificate from the State Level Environmental Impact Assessment Authority on 25.10.2013 for quarrying 1400 cubic meters of mineral each year.

c) The technical staff of Mines & Geology Department inspected the quarry lease area on 26.11.2020. A show cause notice No.1652/D13-2/2021 dated 19.02.2021 was issued, for which petitioner submitted on 15.03.2021. The 2nd respondent issued Demand Notice No.1652/D13-2/2021 dated 11.02.2022. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed revision before the 1st respondent. The revisional authority modified the demand notice and directed the petitioner to pay Rs.22,11,056/- towards normal seigniorage fee and Rs.22,11,056/- towards penalty. The remaining amount of Rs.88,44,223/- is waived off. Challenging the same, the above writ petition is filed.

3. This Court by order dated 30.01.2023 granted stay of all further proceedings subject to deposit of 50% of demand amount as per the order of the revisional authority within a period of eight weeks.

4. Counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4. The 4th respondent deposed to the affidavit. In the counter affidavit, it was contended, interalia, that petitioner did not deposit the amount as per the direction of this Court on 30.01.2023.

5. Heard Sri Kirthi Teja Kondaveeti, learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for respondents.

6. In the show cause notice issued by the 2nd respondent, two of the breaches among the other are: -

"1. On calculation with percentage of recovery mentioned in Approved Mining Plan 15%, the yield of useful Granite in the quarry lease is 1637.513 Cbm. As per the records of ADM&G, Palamaneru, the lease holder have obtained permits for a quantity of 2482.518 Cbm. There is a stock of 451.78 Cbm within the leased area. Hence, the total quantity comes to 2934.298 Cbm. There is a variation for a quantity of 1296.786 Cbm excess to the limit approved in mining plan and EC without obtaining approved modified Mining Plan/ Scheme. Hence, the lease holder transported 1296.786 Cbm of colour Granite more than the approved mining plan quantity which is a breach of Clause (h)(iii) of Sub Rule 5 of the APMMC Rules, 1966".

"4. The lessee transported 1296.786 cbm of colour Granite more than the approved mining plan quantity from the leased area violated under Rules of APMMC Rules, 1966. Hence, initiate necessary action for the misuse of 1296.786 CBM of the permits of t