APHC010011012025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3310]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 627/2025 Between:

Balakrishna Road Metals ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. THATHIREDDY ASHOK SRIVASTAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY The Court made the following:

ORDER

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“…..declaring the actions of the respondents in failing to address the grievances of the petitioner vide representations dated 15.11.2024 and 14.11.2023 regarding improper royalty calculations and exploitation by the royalty contractor as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and Consequently direct the respondents to ensure that royalty calculations for road metal and building stone are in accordance with the approved mining plan and RTI Act information dated 09.10.2023 i.e., 1 CBM equals 2.5 tons and pass such other and further orders…..”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, appearing for the respondents 1 to 4.

3. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions which are urged in the writ petition and limited his request to dispose of the representations dated 15.11.2024 and 14.11.2023 submitted by the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case.

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, appearing for the respondents 1 to 4, readily agreed to dispose of the said representations submitted by the petitioner, if they are pending with the respondent-authorities.

5. In view of the submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, this Court need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition. This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued, in view of the Judgment of the Honourable Apex Court in “The Government of India v.

P.Venkatesh ”, wherein the Honourable Apex Court held that such orders may make for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory

1 2019 (8) SCALE 544

institutions. But, they do no service to the cause of justice. Hence, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.

6. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to dispose of the representations dated 15.11.2024 and 14.11.2023 submitted by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

7. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.

Date: 09.01.2025 ARR HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO Writ Petition No.627 of 2025 Date: 09.01.2025 ARR