IVI/s. Sandiya lnternational Granites v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in blocking the lD Nos. 20110901 46.2O11090147 2O11090148 2011090352, and 2011100359 in respect of the leased areas of the Petitioner over an extent of 200 hect,257 hect, 1,00 hect, 2.OO hect and 5.30 hect in Sy.No. 596 of Nagulamalyala Village, Kohapally tvlandal, Karimnagar District during the subsistence of lease period as lllegal arbitrary and against the Principles of Natural Justice and violative of Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of lndia and also declare the actlon of Respondents in not issuing the dispatch permits during the pendency of the Revision applications dated O3/01/2025 as illegal arbitrary and against the Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondents to issue '. dispatch permits to the Petitioners by unblocking the lD numbers lD Nos. 2011090146, 2011090147 2011090148, 2011090352, itnd 20i1100359 for the granite blocks tc be dispatched from the leased areas of the petitrcner. lA NO: 1 OF 2025, Petition under Section 15'l CpC praying that in the circunlstances stated in the affidavit fjled jn support of the petition, the High Court ma;, be pleased to direct the Resporrdents to issue dispatch permrts to the petitioner by unblocking the lD Nos 20'l 1090146, ZO11O9O14T, 2O11OgO148, 2011090352, and 2011100359 penctrng disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt G.VtDyA SAGAR, Sr. COUNSEL, REp. FOR SRI P.GIRI KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondents: Gp FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRTJUSTTCE T. VINOD KT]MAR WRIT PETITION No.3939 of 2025 ORDER: Heard Sri G.Vidya Sagar, learned Senior Counsel for Sri P. Giri Krishna, leamed counsel lor the petitioner and leamed Govemment Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing on behalf of respondents, and perused the record. With the consent of leamed counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioner in brief is that aggrieved by two separate demand notices dated 19-07 -2023, the petitioner had filed separate Revision petitions in terms of Section 35-A of the Telangana State Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 (for short 'the Rules') and the said Revisions are pending consideration

3. It is the fur1her case of the petitioner that pending adjudication of the Revision applications submitted, the respondents, .claiming that the amounts demanded under the above mentioned demand notices are due and also claiming that the petitioner having violated the Environmental Clearance norns, have blocked the following 2 ID numbels of its quarries viz., (1) ID No.20 11090146, extent of lease area 2.00 Hect., lease period 27-0g_2009 to 2l_0g_2029, (2) 2011090147, extent of leased area 2.2j H.ect, leased period 28-08-2009 to 27-08-2029,.(3) 2011090148, ertent of leased area

1.00 Hect,, lease period 28-0g_2009 to 2.t-Og_202g, (4) ID No.2011090352, extent of leased area 2.00 Hect, lease period 12-10-20ICt to 1t-t0-2029, and (5) ID No.20l I 100359, exrent of leased area 5.30 Hect., lease period 04-02-2010 Lo 03_02_2030; and that as a result of blocking of the aforesaid lDs, thr: petitioner is not in a position to obtain dispatch/transport permits for transportati,ln of colour granites from its quarries.

4. Petitioner further contends that insofar :rs the clemand of normal seigniorage fee made on petitioner by tvr o separate demand notices/proc eedings dated 19-07-2023, the petitioner had made payment of normal seigniorage fee of I{s.2,26.I 95l_ and Rs.95,669i- on 2l-11-2024, and insofar as the demand ol'penalty is concemed. s;ince Revision filed by it is pending consideration, the aforesaid amount has not been paid.

5. It is also contended by the petitioner that this Court in similar circumstanct:s in w.P.No-25 r g of 2025 had permitted the petitioner r & 3 therein to pay 50%o of the normal seigniorage fee pending adjudication of the Revision application by respondent authorities, and since the petitioner in the present case has paid the 100% normal seigniorage fee demanded, the respondents be directed to unblock the IDs to enable the petitioner to generate the d ispatch/transport perm i ts.

6. Learned Govemment Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents, on the other hand, would submit that the petitioner had 5 quarry leases and in respect of 2 quarry leases, demand notices have been issued for normal seigniorage fee along with 5 times penalty. 7 . Learned Govemment Pleader would further submit that though the aforesaid demand notices were issued in Jr;Jy , 2023, the petitioner had filed the Revision in terms olRule 35-A of the Rules only on O3-Ol-2025 and thus, the same are pending consideration'

8. Leamed Govemment Pleader would further submit that the Pollution Control authorities have issued notices dated 20-06-2024 for violation of Environmental Clearance norms, and by separate orders dated l5-Ol-2025 under the Air (Prevention and Control of 4 Prohibitionl Act, 1981 ( for short ,the Air Act,) rLnd Water (Prevention and Control of pollution Act, 1974 (for. short ,the Water Act'), the Pollution Control authorities have d jrected the petitioner n,rt to cany out mining beyond the permitted production capacity and also excess production without obtaining C,lnsent For Establishnte,nt (CFE) and Consent For Operation (CFO) from the Board in resipect of colour granite mines of 2.27 Hectares and 5.30 Hectares in Sy.No.596, Nagulamalyala (V), Korhapally (M), Karimnagar District.

9. LearneC Government Pleader would furthei submit that since the Pollution Control authorities by proceedings dated l5-01-2025 directed the petitioner to adhere to the provisions of Air Act and Water Act, if only the petitioner operates its quarries conhrming to the nomts prescribed under the aforesaid enactments, the IDs which u.ere blocked for violation of norms car-r be unblocked permitting the petitioner to operate the same-

10. I have taken note of respective contentions urged.

11. Since. this Court, in similar circumstances taking note of the fact of Revision preferred by the quarry holder. is pending i i l I I I I I I 5 consideration, directed the respondent authorities to granVpermit the petitioner to obtain transpor?dispatch permit subject to petitioner paying 50o/o of nor:rnal seigniorage fee demanded under the demand notices which were subject matter of Revision and also paying normal seigniorage fee charges for the permits that are granted pursuant to the order of this Court.

12. This Court, thereafter in a Writ Petition vide W.P.No.3047 of 2025 had directed the petitioner therein to make the total payment of normal seigniorage fee demanded as a pre-condition for issuance of dispatch permits.

13. In the facts of the present case, since, the petitioner claims to have paid 100% of normal seigniorage fee on 21-11-2024 against the demand notices dated 19-07-2023, and insofar as the violation of Environmental Clearance is concerned, since the said violation is subject matter of Telangana Pollution Control Board, with which the respondent are not concemed, this Court is of the view that the respondent authorities are to be directed to dispose of the Revision preferred by the petitioner against the demand notices dated l9-07- 2023 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondent authorities are further directed { ( .-\ffi X 5 to activate the blocked IDs of petitioner as noted herein above by duly velilying as to the payment of normal seignioragc fee under the above nrentioned two demand notices.

14. However, it is made clear that pending dispo:ial of the Revision, or the respondent authorities unblocking the 1-retitioner,s Quarry IDs. petitioner shall pay 100% of norma, seigniorage fee in respect of transport/dispatch pemits that are generated l-rereinafter and also undertake its operation confirming to th,: consent norms/conditions as imposed by the Telangana pollution Control Board..

15. Subject to above direction, the Writ petition is disposed of. No costs l6 Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed SD/-A. SRINIVASA REDDY / //rRUE coPY// ASffrfNr REGISTRAR / J));; o.,,".*- -StaG ; i"j;;il;;" " The Prrncipal Secretarv lndustriels and Commer,:e Depa,tment, Dr B. R Ambedkar Secretariat. riyCerjUid, The Director of Mines and Geology, Hyderabad. The Deputy Director of Mines And Geology, Warangal, Telangana State. The Assistart Director of Mines And Gelology, Karimnagar, Telangana State. One CC to SiRt p.ctRl KR|SHNA, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs tc Gp FOR MINE9,AND GEOLOGY High Court r)r the State of Ielanga'ra et Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Ccpies \ I To, 1 2 4 5 o 7 BSR GJP n HIGH COURT DATED: 12t0212025 ORDER WP.No.3939 of 2025 llE rl 14 i{r 1 1 g rEB 2025 t+ ) J e 'rtr/ * \i.:*-i; DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS €gof.'W