APHC010031542025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3310]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 1645/2025 Between:

Tirumala Granites ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradeshq and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. UTTARA LEGAL Counsel for the Respondent(S):

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

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:-

“… pleased to issue a Writ order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Demand Notice No.1497/MDL/2022-6, dt 12.06.2023 issued by Respondent No.2 without considering the reply given by the petitioner for the Show cause notice dt 12.09.2022 and thereby insisting the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.16,80,572/- towards penalty as arbitrary, illegal in violation of Principles of Natural Justice without jurisdiction and violative of Article 14 and 19 of Constitution of India and contrary to APMMC Rules, 1966 consequently set aside the same and pass….

2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner is a Partnership firm and was granted a Mineral dealer license (for short ‘the MDL’) on 09.10.2018 by the Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Srikakulam for a period of 20 years. Thereafter, 2^nd respondent had issued a show-cause notice on 16.08.2022 wherein it was mentioned that the technical staff had visited the petitioner’s unit on 06.04.2022 and reported that there are 3 number of raw granite blocks of 301 cbm. As per the inspection report, the difference quantity is 4 cbm available in the MDL unit of the petitioner. In response to the same, the petitioner has submitted explanation on 12.09.2022 explaining the reasons. Thereafter, Respondent No.2 has passed the impugned demand notice, dated 12.06.2023 imposing a penalty of Rs.16,80,572/- which is inclusive of normal seignorage fee, consideration amount, five times penalty, DMF and MERIT in exercise of power under Rule 26(3) (ii) of APMMC Rules. The petitioner was advised to file revision before the Government and accordingly, the petitioner filed revision on 23.08.2023. During pendency of the Revision, Respondent No.2 is threatening to take action against the demand notice, dated 12.06.2023. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed.

3. Heard Mr K.Sai Naveen, learned counsel representing on behalf of Uttara Legal for petitioner and Smt Sudeepthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for the respondents.

4. On hearing, while reiterating the averments made in Writ Petition learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aggrieved by the Demand Notice, dated 12.06.2023, the petitioner has filed revision before the 1^st respondent. During pendency of the said Revision, the 2^nd respondent is proceeding to take steps in pursuance of the impugned Demand Notice, dated 12.06.2023 which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner requests to pass appropriate orders.

5. Smt Sudeepthi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for the respondents opposed for grant of any relief in this Writ Petition and prayed to dismiss the same.

6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, the 1^st respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the Revision filed by the petitioner, dated 12.06.2023 within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs.

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

_________________________

DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.

Date: 24.01.2025 TM