Heard Sri v. Hariharan, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Rohit Pogula

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 grant an order, direction or writ, more so in nature of Mandamus, A) To declare the Impugned Demand Notice No.652 Ngt2O244 dated 06.11.2024 issued.by the 4th Respondent demanding a sum of Rs.2,40,59,8731 from the Petitioner towards normal seigniorage fee and five (5) times penalty with other statutory payments, in connection with Quarry Lease for Building Stone and Road Metal over an extent of 2.000 Hectares in Survey No.35/A/1 of Kothagattu Village, Athmakur Mandal, Hanumakonda District, as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, without jurisdiction, contrary in law, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and in violation of rules provided under Telangana State Minor Minerals Concessions Rules, 1966 and consequently, set'aside the same. B) To declare the Revocation Proceedings No.2723lQL-lM/GU2013 dated

12.09.2024 along with the consequential acts thereon, as null and void and further directing the 3rd and 4th Respondents to allow the Petitioner to do mining operations over the quarry lease area and restore back the forfeiture security deposit of the Petitione t. ' 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 suspend the Demand Notice No. 652N912O24-4 dated 06.11.2024 issued by 4th Respondent, in the interest of justice, pending disposal of the writ petition in. lA NO: 2 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 3rd and 4th Respondents allow the Petitioner to carry mining operations and also to issue/release of dispatch permits to the Petitioner for transportation of Building Stone and Road Metal in and over an extent of 2.00 Hectares in Sy.No.35/A1 (Patta Land) of Kothagattu Village, Athmakur Mandal, Hanumakonda District, in the interest of justice, pending disposal of the writ petition in. lA NO: 3 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 3rd and 4th Respondents not to give any effect to the Revocation Proceedings No.2723lQL-1ANGLI2O13 dated 12.09.2024 hence forthwith, in the interest of justice, pending disposal of the writ petition in. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V.HARIHARAN, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY SRI ROHIT POGULA The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.9779 of 2025 ORDER: Heard Sri V. Hariharan, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Rohit Pogula, learned counsel for petitioner, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4.

2. Perusal of record would reveal that 4'r' respondent has issued demand notice dated 28.06.2024 to the petitioner directing him to pay an amount of Rs.l ,34,08,9801- towards normal seigniorage fee, Rs.6,70,44,9001- towards five (5) times penalty and Rs.1,07,27,1841- towards permit fee, in total Rs.9,57,40,1l8/-. Challenging the said demand notice, petitioner has filed a revision on 23.07.2024 before 1"'responderiUrevisional authority in terms of Rule 35-A of the Telangana State Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 (for short 'the Rules') and it is pending. While the matter stood thus, 3'd respondent has issued a show cause notice dated

08.08.2024 to petitioner with regard to determination of his quarry lease as per Rule 31(xvi) of the Rules. Thereafter, vide proceedings dated 12.09.2024, 3'd respondent determined the 2 KL, J w P.No 9779 of 2025 lease held by petitioner. Challenging the said proceedings, petitioner had filed a Writ Petition vide tr'.P.No.26441 of

2024. Vid,, order dated 26.09.2024, this Court disposed of the said Writ Petition directing 1" respondent to dispose of revisiorr dtrled 23.01.2024 filed by petitioner, u,ithin fbur (4) weeks fiorn the said date. This Court also directed the respondcnls not to take any coercive steps against petitioner pursuanl to the proceedings dated 12.09 2024, pending adjudication o{' the said revision. Even then, l" respondcnt/revisional authority did not dispose of the said revision filed by petitioner dated 23.O7.2024. However, 4'h responclent has issued demand notice dated 06.11.2024 demanding an amount of Rs.33,69,730/- towards normal seigniorage fee, Rs.1,68,48,650/- towards frve (5) times penalty and Rs.26,95,7841- towards permit fee, in total Rs.2,40,59,873/-. Challenging the said dernand norice, petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

3. Lcamed Assistant Govemment Pleader for Mines and Geology has produced written instructions of 4'h respondent wherein it is stated that on re-verification of ETS report, the 3 KL, J w P No 9779 o4 2025 OB volume was considered twice and the same was rectified with a differential quantity arrived at 186132 MT within the . leased atea. Therefore, revised demand notice dated

06.11.2024 was issued by duly considering the volume of mineral as recorded during ETS survey with normal seigniorage fee of Rs.1,21,37,580i- and Rs.6,06,87,900/- towards five (5) times penalty, totaling to Rs.8,66,62,3221-, including other taxes for transporting the mineral more than the permitted quantity from the leased area. It is further stated that petitioner excavated the mineral from the quarry lease area and the same is being processed and supplied to various Government Departments without valid waybill which is in violation of Rule 34(l) of the Rules. It is also stated that the Govemment fras introduced One Time Settlement Scheme vide G.O.Rt.No.60, Industries and Commerce (Mines- l) Department, dated 12.03.2025. Hence, petitioner can avail the said OTS Scheme. A copy of the said written instructions is placed on record.

4. As discussed supra, petitioner had filed revision dated

23.07.2024 challenging the demand notice dated 28.06.2024, J 4 KL, J W P.No.9779 of 2O25 befbre l'' respondent and the same is pending. Despite order datcd 2(r 09.2024 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.26447 of 2024 directing l" respondent to dispose of the said revision tiled by petitioner. l" respondenr is not disposing of the sarne. During pendency of the said revision, 3"r respcrrrdent has issued proceedings dated 12.0g.2024 determinirrg the lease held by petitioner, and 4'h respondent has issued thc impugned demand notice dated 06.11.2024 to pctitioner. During pendency of the said rel,ision, 3'd and ,1'r' respclnclents cannot issue the aforesaid proceedings. As discussed supra, petitioner had filed the said revision challenging demand notice dated 28.06.2024 on various grounds. I'herefore, l" respondent has to decide the same and subject to the result of the same, 3'd-and 4th respondents can initiate action thereafter. There is deviation to the said proceedings. Hence, the same are liable to be set aside. Further, with regard to OTS Scheme, it is for the petitioner to avaiI the sa rnc.

5. In thc light of the aforesaid discussion, proceedings dated I2.0t).2024 issued by 3'd respondent and clemand notice 5 \ KI,, J w P No_t)779 0l 2025 dated 06.11.2024 issued by 4th respondent are set asidg and this Writ Petition is disposed of directing I't respondent to dispose of the revision dated 23.07.2024 filed by petitioner in terms of Rule 35-A of the Rules, challenging the demand notice dated 28.06.2024, strictly in accordance with law, within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the matter will be viewed seriously. 4'h respondent shall submit the said instructions/file counter before l"'respondent in the said revision. Liberty is granted to petitioner to file additional grounds in the said revision before 1" respondent. Thereupon, it is for l" respondent to consider the same. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. ,/TRUE COPY// SD'. N.RAJA OPA L DEPUTY REG TRAR SECTION OFFICER To

1. The Secretary, Mines, lndustries and Commerce Department' At Secretariat' Hvderabad, State of Telangana' District.

3.+f, :Bffi iB**'*::il,,"X"lls'68"ffi ilu,"i)::!:ig3l"l1#J,i""E:i' +. irr-e'Aisistant Director of Mines and Geology' Hanumakonda District' 6. d;'cd t.; sit nbntr PoGULA, Advo-cate^[oPUCl 6. Two CCs to Gp roi irrriN"e-s-n-ir'tj 6EOiOCjV, High court for the State of -' 7. Two CD CoPies Telangana, at HYderabad. [OUT] PSK. PSK. HIGH COURT DATED:0810412025 I ORDER WP.No.9779 of 2025 /; i) -.-=-':==' ..i j i( ihc "r( J c^' (( } a r\ J+ ? 2 At3 Z{]Z5 * ()6:sPArcH t_! { DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS