The High Court · 2025

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 Respondent authorities in not considering the representation dt.28.1 1 .2024 wherein the quarry lease area for mineral Dolomite over an extent of 10.13 Ha in Sy.No.401 of Laxmipuram village, Bonakal Mandal. Khammam district is proposed for constru:tion of School contrary to G.O I\r'1s.No.74, dt_16.02.2002 and GO.Ms.No.59. dt 04.10.2016 and also contrary to the opinion of the Respondent No.5 vide his lett=r d1.27 _05.2024 is arbitrary, illegal, u n co nstitutiona I and violative of principles o" natural Justice and seeking the r:onsequential direction i. to direct the Prin cipal Secretary, Education Department, Respondent No.3, and the District Collector, Respondent No.4 to cancel the proposed con$truction of integrated Residential School over the quarry lease area i.e. over an extent of 10.13 Ha in Sy No.40' of I axmipuram village, Bonakal Mandal, Khammam district. ii To direct the Direc.or of Mines and Geology, Hyderabad, Respondent Nq.5, to grant the quarry leasr,r by conSidering the 2nd renewal of quarry lease applicaiion dt.18,11.2022 n favor of the Petitioner. 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 may, be pleased to direct the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Responder t No.3, and the District Collector, Respondent Nq.4 not ta proceed with the construction of integrated residential school over an extgnt of 10. 13 Ha irr Sy.No.401 af Laxmipuram village, Bonakal Mandal, Khammam district. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRt cOURIDEVI KRISHNAIAH Counsel for the Respondents No.:1,5&6 : GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY Counsel for the Respondents No.2,4&7 : GF FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.3 : GP FOR EDUCATION The Coqrt made the following; ORDER 0 ORDER: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W etitio .7L 2 t20 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for responjent Nos'1, 5 and 6' learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos 2' 4 and 7 and learned GOvernment Pleader for Education appearing for respondent No.3 and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing For the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioner, in brief is that earlier it was granted a quarry lease for Dolomite over an extent of

10.13 Ha in Sy.No.401 of Laxmipuram Village, Bonakal Mandal, Khammam District; and that on the expiry of the original quarry lease tenure' it had approached the respondents-authorities and submitted an application seeking renewal of the lease for a further period of 20 years'

3.Itisthefurthercaseofthepetltionerthatonsubmittingapplication seekingrenewalofthequarrylease,therespondents-authoritieshave issued Letter of Intent (LoI) dt.18,11 2022 as per Rule 12 of the Telangana State Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 and based on the aforesaid LoI, the petitioner has made payment of Rs'18,22,22ql- towards renewal fee. 2

4. It is further contended by the petitioner that while it is taking further steos to obtain environmentar crearance for estabrishment and consent for cperations from the concerned authorities for submitting the same to the respondents-authorities for them to consider the apprication made by it for renewal of quarry lease for a fufther period of 20 years, the 2nd respondent authority through the 4h respondent had allotted the aforesaid quarry lease area to the 3d respondent for setting up of Integrated Residential School, without determining the ,e;rse granted to the petitione- and also not refunding the amount paid by it towards renewal fee

5. Per ccntra, learned Government pleader appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 5 and 6 would submit that the petitioner has not been granted reneyral of the lease after expiry of the original lear;e tenure and only Lol has been issued calling upon it to submit vario -rs clearances mentioned therein within a period of six months from the dar:e of issuance of the aforesaid LoI to consider the application submitted by t.

6. Learned Government pleader would further subnrit that the Government now intends to set up an Integrated Residential School in the subject land a nd the petitioner as a matter of right canlot claim for renewal of its quarry lease nor claim that without determinrn J the leases, the land could be allotted to the 3d respondent. _:'_ \ I 3

7. I have taken note ofthe respective contentions urged. B. Firstly, it is to be noted that determination of a lease would arise only in case of existing lease. Admittedly, in the facts of the present case, the quarry lease granted in favour of the petitioner. initially had expired and the petitioner only having made application seeking for renewal as no renewal of lease having been granted in its favour for the second term of 20 years, though LoI has been issued calling upon it to submit various documents mentioned therein, the petitioner cannot claim that without determining the lease, subject land could not have been allotted to the 3'd respondent for setting up of School.

9. Further, the respondents now intend to set up an Integrated Residential school in the subject land, the petitioner as a matter of right cannot claim that the subject land should only be given to him for quarrying purposes, more so, the original lease tenure having lapsed in the year 2022 itself.

10. However, the subject land for which the petitioner has made an application seeking renewal of the quarry lease is now allotted to the 3'd respondent for setting up of Integrated Residential School, the respondents-authorities are required to reject/return the application of the petitioner along with the renewal fee paid by him, since no such renewal of lease can be granted to it. 4 1 1. In view of the above, the Writ petition is disposed tf directing the respondents- authorities in particurar respondent Nos.1, 5 i,rnd 6 to return the renewar apprication submitted by the petitioner arong wrth renewar fee paid by it. No order as to costs. T2 I,4iscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed , SD/.S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO .F S A TeNT REGISTRAR ,/ //TRUE COPY// I S ECTION OFFICER To, 1 The Secretary lndustries and Commerce (Mrnes-l)..Deoartm ent Government i"rJ,io-r"r1 State of r";ft;; D; El.d A*uefur'r' Sec'etariat buildinss' "i Tank Bund. HYderabad, Telangana. The Secretan. Revenue Department, Government of Telangana.' State of e R AmoeJkir, SeCret'ariat buildinss, Tank Eund' Hvderabad'. i;;";;;;'li Telangana. 2

3. The Secretary. Education Department' Government of Telangana' State of " i;ir;s,;;.bi a-R-At"b"atii, Secretariat buildings Tank E'und' Hvderabad' Tehmgana.

4. The Collector and District Magistrate, Khammam, Telangana 5. The Director of Mines and Geology, Go-vernment of Telanga'ra' 2nd Floor' My Homes Sarovar Complex, Hyderabad, lelangana 6- The Assistant Director of Mines and Geqlogy, Khammam' Telangana' 7. The Tahsildar Bonakal Mand9l, Khamnnam District, Telangatra B One CC to SF.l GOURIDEVI KRISHNAIAH Advocate IOPUi]l g,TwoCCstoGPFoRM|NESANDGEoLoGY,HighQourtfortheStateof Tblangana. IOUT] 10 T!ryo CCs to GP FOR REVENUE High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad IOUTI 1,1 ' Two CCs to GP FoR EDUCATIoN, FJig!.1 Cqurt for the Stati: of Telangana at Hyderabad OUTI

12.Iwo CD Copies BSK BS I lAt s (n 1t A,i .zo.zs i ,+ spa c qEo * HIGH COURT DATED:0710312025 ORDER WP.No.7102 of 2025 , .'v * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,/, /a 26 /J,//5