M/s. Sai Baba Metal lndustry, ReP v. 1. 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 writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of wRlT oF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in not disposing of Revision Petition filed on 12-08-2024, questioning the Demand Notice No.7486tsl2oo7 d1.15-o5-2024 0f the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology and Proceedings with further action for recovery as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and unconstitutional and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice without jurisdiction contrary to the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act' 1957 and T.S. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under section 151 cPc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court r-nay be pleased to stay the Demand Notice No.7486lsl2ool , dt.15-os-2o24 of the Assistant Director of Mines an( Geology. pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. N. SHOBA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MTNES AND GEOI_OGY The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.5648 of 2o25 ORDER Heard Iearned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geologz appearing for respondent Nos.l to 4, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage.

2. Shorn of ttnnecessary . details, the case of the petitioner in brief, is that aggricved by the dernand notice dt. 15.O5.2O24, it had filed revision under Rule 35A of the Telangana Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 (for short 'the Rules') with the l"t respondent on 12.08.2024; tLrat while the aforesaid revision frled by the petitioner is pending consideration, the 1 st respondent-authorities initiated action to recover ttre arnounts being clairned under the aforesaid dernand notice; and that if the respondents are allowed to recover the arnount as per the dernand notice issued, the revision filed by it would becorne otiose and redundant. Thus, the petitioner seeks for a 2 direction to the 1"t respondent to dispose of the revrsion filed by it in a time bound manner and also resrrain the respondents frorn taking action to reco,u'er the amount demanded under the noticb, dt. 15.05.2024, pending disposal of the revision.

3. Per contra, learned Government Pleader lor Nlines and Geolog,, while not disputing the fact of the petitiorrer being issued with dernald notice and the petitioncr havi.ng filed a revision in Forrn J as per Rule 35A o1- the }lules on

72.Oa.2O24 , and the authorities iss;uing recovery proceeding w-ould however, submit that if this Coul t were to direct the respondent authorities to dispose of the aforesaid revision in a tirne bound rnanner, the authorities would abide by the said. rlirection. Insofar as the claim of the petitioner of the respond ent authorities initiating steps for rer:overy of amounts due under demand notice is cor: cerned. learned Governrnent Pleader would submit that no notice has been issued to the petitioner under Revenue Recovery Act as now and apprehending such action, the present Writ Petition filed.

4. I have taken note of the respective sr_rbrrrissior.rs rnade.

5. Having regard to the subrnissions macle as altove and taking nofb qf the fact that aggrieved by the demand notice, 3 dt. 15.O5.2O24, the petitioner traving frled a revision before the 1"t respondent as provided under the Rr-rles, this Cor.rrt is of the view that w"ithout expressing any opinion on merits of the rnatter, the lst.respondent amthority is to be directed to dispose of the aforesaid revision in a tirne bound rnanner.

6. . Further, pending revision, if authorities are allowed to proceed with the recovery the respondent proceedings, tLre revision preferred by the petitioner against the dernand notice would become otiose and redundant lSee: Anab-E-Shahi Wines and Distilleries Priaate Litnited a. Appellate DePutg Conrnlissioner, Secunderabad Diuision, Narnpallg, Ilgderabadll.

7. Admittedly, as of now the petitioner is not issued with any notice by the respondent amthorities seeking to recover the arnounts due under the demand notices for this Court to hold initiation of such action wotrld result in frr-rstrating the revision pending consideration. B. It is trite law, that a writ of rnandarnr.rs cannot be issr.red in advance forbearing a statutory amthority frorn perforrning his functions and duties. (See I{.1{. I{ochunnl I Order dated 21.03.1995 in W.P. No.5193 of 1995 i I 4 tt. Stq.te of Ma.drasz) 9 In vicrv of the above, the Writ petition directing the l "r the petitioner on disposed of respondent to dispose of th,e revision filed by 12.Oa.2024 within a period of eight 1S (o8) s from lhe date of receipt of a copy o_l this ir is respondent authorities p,er demetnd notice, made clear that in the meantime if the rnitiate any action for recovery of the amount as the petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court 10. Subject to the ahove observation and direction, the Writ Petirion is disposed of. No costs. 71. Consequently, miscellale pendin g rn this Writ Petiti ous petitions, jf any, on sh lst an dcl sed //TRUE COPY// SD/-K.SREERAMA MURTHY AS,QIqTANT REGTSTRAR \t \, sEcTloN OFFICER To, '1. The Secretary. lndustries.and Commerce Department. The State of ^ ]gtapang, S-e_cretariat, Hvoeraual"'"' "v eepcrr I 5iil:tss;itixtylff '"f !,h?.:![{,3ff F,#l;f,{d:'{:::;,;,":,:. 4. The Assistint Directo 5. One CC to SMT. N. S 6. Two CCs to Gp FOR , Telangana. IOUTJ cD coiies Jff BSK W 21959 SCC OEd,ile SC 84 HIGH COURT DATED:2510212025 CC TODAY ORDER WP.No.5648 of 2025 'cf' 1i4E i TA 14. ,( :J :r 2BFT|}2M L//, \ ) .)') '/j' \: DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS C4{,4 tS \G. K*,