S.No./

W.P.No.

Petitioner & Respondents

Relief sought / Relief granted

Filing/ Disposal/

Follow -up

1.

W.P.No.9513/93 and 7725/94

Between:

SAMATA, (Regd No. 554/90), a rural Development,
Society registered under the Societies Regulation,
Act, 1860 having its registered Office at
Peda Mallapuram, Sankhavaram Mandal,
East Godavari District, represented by its
Executive Director, R.Ravi.

…Petitioner.

AND

State of Andhra Pradesh,
Represented by its principle
Secretary to Government,
Science & Technology (Forests- III)
Department, Secretariat Buildings,
Hyderabad and others.

Relief Sought :  prayed that this Honorable Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to terminate the mining leases in existence in the Borra Gram Panchayat area of Anantagiri Mandal Visakhapatnam District and prosecute the persons responsible for violation of section 2 of Forest (Conservarion) Act 1980 and A.P scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation 1959 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit  the Circumstance of the case.

Relief granted : In view of the above discussion, we hold that there is no prohibition for grant of mining leases by the government either under regulation of 1959 or the . Act no.67 of 1957 until the issuance of the notification by the governor on 7-8-1991. The said notification does not direct imposition of restriction retrospectively, though the v schedule of the constitution empowers the governor to direct regulations to have retrospective effect of the notification issued by the governor on 7-8-1991, the notification comes intobeffect prospectively. We, therefore,see no force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the leases granted earlier to the notification also have to be declared as void. In the result, the writ petitions are dismissed. But in the circumstances of the case without any order as to costs.

Dismissed on 8th Apr 1995

2.

W.P.No.3734 of 1993.

SAKTI, a voluntary social organisation
for the upliftment of Tribal (Regd. No.
76/85), Rampachodavaram, East Godavari
District, represented by its Director,
Dr. P. Sivaramakrishna                                                                    ....Petitioner

VERSUS

1. State of Andhra Pradesh represented
by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Energy, Forests, Environments, Science &
Technology (Forests-III) Department,
Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Director of Mines and Geology, Hyderabad.

3. The District Collector East Godavari
District, Kakinada.

4. The District Forest Officer, Kakinada.

5. Union of India represented by its
Secretary to Government Ministry of
Environment and Forests, Paryavaran
Bhavan, New Delhi.

6. M/s. Hyderabad Abrasives Limited, Hyderabad.

7. Adivasi Integrated Corporation : Rajahmundry.

8. Sangam Minerals, Rajahmundry.

9. M/s. Girijan Minerals, Rampachodavaram.

Relief Sought : seeking a direction to the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 to terminate the Mining Leases in existence in the scheduled areas of East Godavari District and to prosecute the persons responsible for violation of Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulations, 1959

Relief Granted: prohibited from mining operations in an area covered by the Act other than the area which they had already completed mining operations. However, they should be permitted to remove material already dug up and lying in the area under the supervision of the Joint Director of the District, Assistant Director of Mines and Geology and the Conservator of Forests, Rajahmundry. The Writ Petition is allowed with costs.

Order

Disposed On : 13-Oct-1993

News

5.

W.P.M.P.

30456/96

Karam Borrannadora

Vs

Asst.Director of the Mines & Minerals, and others

Relief Granted:" By the impugned order dt.23.10.96 the petitioner was directed not to carry on the quarry work and not to transport the quarry until further orders. The basis for issuance of such an order is on the ground that the work is being done by somebody else and not by the petitioner himself.

Under these circumstances the 3 rd respondent-MRO is directed to cause an enquiry about the truth or otherwise relating to the actual person that is doing quarrying work within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Interim direction ordered on 21.11.96 to continue until further orders."

Disposed on 3 -12-1997

3.

Civil appeals No.s 4601-02 of 1997

Samatha versus

State of A.P and others
    

Order

4.

W.P no.19282 of 1998

BETWEEN:

1.Indian Rayon and Industries Ltd. a Company incorporated under the Registered office at Vereval (Gujarat)
2.   Arun Dega

and

1. State of A.P. rep. By the Secretary to the Govt., Social Welfare Department Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2. State of A.P. rep. By the Prl. Secretary To the Govt. Industries & Commerce
Dept. Secretariat, Hyderabad.
3. Union of India, rep. By the Secretary To the Government, Ministry of Steel & Mines, New Delhi.

Relief Sought:Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ order or direction of like nature.

Relief Granted: The issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in “SAMATA VS STATE OF A.P.”.

      Following the said judgment and for the reasons mentioned therein, this writ petition is dismissed.

writ petition is dismissed.

5.

W.P no.1571/2006

Between:

1.         “DHIMSA” a society registered under A.P. Societies Registration Act 2001 (No. 938 of 2003), having its office at D. No. 9-22, Lochaliputtu Colony, near Degree College, Paredu, Visakhapatnam District, Rep by its President K. Krishna Rao
2.         “SANTI” a voluntary social organization for the uplifment of Tribes People, (Regd. No. 76/85) Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District, Represented by its Director, Dr. P. Sivaramakrishna

..PETITIONERS

AND

1. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary to Government, Industries and Commerce (Mines) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad
2. Principal secretary to Government, Energy, Forest, Environment, Sciences & Technology, Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad
3. Principal Secretary to Government, Tribunal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad
4. Union of India, Rep by its Secretary to Government, Department of Environment, Forests & Wildlife, Paryavaran Bhavan, C. G. O. Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi.
5. National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, 6th Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan
6. A.P. Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. No. 8-3-945, II floor, Pancom Business Center, Ameerpet, Hyderabad-500 016 Rep by its Vice-chairman and Managing Director
7. M/s. Jindal South West Holdings Public Limited, Jindal Mansion, 5-A, Dr. G. Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai-400 026.

Relief Sought :  Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the words “to an undertaking owned of controlled by the State or Central Government or “ in provise to sub-section 5 of section 11 of mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) act. 1957 as unconstitutional and void and consequently declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in entering in to an agreement with the 7th Respondent in as extent of 2,446 hectars in Araku And Sapparla area of Visakhapatnam district as violative of articles 14,21 and V Schedule to the constitution of India and the laws made there under including the provisions of A.P. Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation, Section 11(5) of Mines & Minerals (Regulation & Development) Act, 1958 and Forest (conservation) Act, 1980.

Order

6.

W.P.No.1571 of 2006

Between

“DHIMSA”, a society registered under
A.P. Societies Registration  act, 2001, Paderu,
Visakhapatnam District
Rep, by its President K. Krishna Rao & another

……Petitioners

And

Government of Andhra Pradesh
Rep, by its Principal Secretary,
Industries and Commerce (Mines) Department,
Hyderabad & others

Relief Sought :Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the words “to an undertaking owned of controlled by the State or Central Government or “ in provise to sub-section 5 of section 11 of mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) act. 1957 as unconstitutional and void and consequently declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in entering in to an agreement with the 7th Respondent in as extent of 2,446 hectars in Araku And Sapparla area of Visakhapatnam district as violative of articles 14,21 and V Schedule to the constitution of India and the laws made there under including the provisions of A.P. Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation, Section 11(5) of Mines & Minerals (Regulation & Development) Act, 1958 and Forest (conservation) Act, 1980.

Relief Granted : While disposing of the Writ Petition in the manner indicated above, we make it clear that till the required permission is obtained by the State Government in terms of Section 2(2) of the Act as also environment clearance is granted by the competent authority, the agreement entered in to between respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 7 shall not be implemented.

Order