ORDER:- This Court ordered rule nisi on 13.11.2007 and in W.P.M.P.No.31139 of 2007 made the following order: "In view of the facts and circumstances, the auction may be further proceeded with but the same not to be confirmed for a period of two weeks, in respect of Venkataiah Kalava Reach Nos.1 and 2 and Bedduru, Kondapuram Mandal of Kadapa District." 2. The said interim order is being extended from time to time. 3. Heard Sri N. Subba Rao, learned counsel representing the writ petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Industries representing the respondents. 4. W.V.M.P.No.138 of 2008 is filed to vacate the interim order, dated 13.11.2007. 5. The writ petition is filed for issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in conducting auction of lease hold rights to quarry the sand in respect of Venkaiah Kalava Reach Nos.1 and 2 and Beduduru Reach pursuant to Tender Notice No.534/Sand/07-08, dated 26.10.2007, as illegal and contrary to Section 27 of the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land & Trees Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the purpose of convenience) and Rule 23 of the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land & Trees Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for the purpose of convenience), and consequently to direct the respondents not to conduct auction of the lease hold rights to mine the sand in Venkaiah Kalava Reach Nos.1 and 2 and Beduduru Reach of Konapur Mandal, Kadapa District and to pass such other suitable orders. 6. The second petitioner had sworn to the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. It is stated that Venkaiah Kalava Reach Nos.1 and 2 and Beduduru reach are down stream of Chitravathi River. There is a barrage of about 15 KM upstream. In between the barrage and the sand reaches sought to be auctioned there is a check dam across the river for the purpose of providing drinking water to the villagers. Because of barrage and check dam in the upstream, there is no possibility of accumulation of sand. The sand was accumulated retaining the water and persevering the ground water level underneath and surrounding areas. The petitioners are residents of the villages adjacent to the river and they are primarily relying on the ground water for drinking water as well as irrigation purpose and there is no other source of water. The sand was accumulated retaining the water and persevering the ground water level underneath and surrounding areas. The petitioners are residents of the villages adjacent to the river and they are primarily relying on the ground water for drinking water as well as irrigation purpose and there is no other source of water. The following villages are adjacent to either side of the river having entirely depending on the ground water. There are about 800 to 1000 bore-wells to cultivate the lands. For the last 10 years, there is no flow of water, except this year. The ground water level is being depleted for the last several years. The names of the villages on either side of the river are as follows: Paluru, Pottipadu, Chinnapalle, Dongapalle, Lingamanenipalle, S.Thimmapuram, P.Anantapuram, Mutchumarri, Gangapuram, Nedarapeta, Eluru, Ramireddypalle, Bedudoor, Yanamalachintala, Chavva Nagaiahpalle, B.Kottupalli, B.Kothapalle, Usthikavalipalli, Kondapuram town, Obanna peta, Gandluru and Seethapuram. 7. Further it is averred that previously at no point of time tenders were called for to lift the sand in these three reaches namely Venkaiah Kalava Reach No.1, Venkaiah Kalava Reach No.2 and Beduduru reach. There is no accumulation of new sand in these reaches and the sand is in existence in the river for the last several years. In these three reaches notified, the accumulated sand is less than two meters in depth. If the sand is removed there is no possibility of accumulation of sand in near future and it reduces the capacity of retaining the water, which ultimately causes in depletion of ground water and harmful to the environment and affect their lives. There is a barrage about 15 KM upstream and thereafter there is a check dam in between and remains the same. The sand in existence is static since the construction of barrage on the river. It is known to one and all that the sand possesses the capacity to retain the water preserving and improving the ground water. If the sand is allowed to be removed from the river bed, it may be exposed and retention of the ground water capacity would be reduced drastically. In view of that, after calling for the tenders, the petitioners and the other persons belonging to the above said villages have personally met the second and third respondents and requested them to withdraw the tender notification in respect of Venkaiah Kalava Reach Nos.1 and 2 and Beduduru reach. In view of that, after calling for the tenders, the petitioners and the other persons belonging to the above said villages have personally met the second and third respondents and requested them to withdraw the tender notification in respect of Venkaiah Kalava Reach Nos.1 and 2 and Beduduru reach. They also brought to their notice that there is no excess sand for removal and the depth of the sand is less than 2 meters. If proper enquiry was made about the availability of sand, it would be known whether quarrying the sand would affect or disturb the water table, and whether the sand would accumulate annually or the sand in existence is deposited after construction of the barrage. The check dam was not verified by conducting due enquiry. Unfortunately, the respondents without considering the above said aspects prepared to proceed with the auction detrimental to the interest of surrounding villagers of the river bed, which ultimately forced the petitioners to approach this Court seeking redressal of their grievance. 8. It is further stated that the petitioners were informed that the quantity of sand deposited annually in the river shall be monitored along with the course. Unfortunately without such observation and also without any inspection or studying the impact of the sand mining the area the proposed auction is sought to be conducted due to some political interests, interventions and pressures. The second respondent is required to review the ground water level before permitting auction of mining lease. Apart from that the District Level Committee shall observe the provisions of Rule 23 of the Rules, in accordance with the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.18359 of 2003, dated 16.02.2004. Though the same was brought to the notice of the respondents, they failed to take any steps to stall the auction at least till such exercise is made. As per Rule 9(B)(6) of A.P. Mines and Minerals Concessional Rules, the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology concerned required to obtain necessary clearance from the Conservator of river and the Director, Ground Water Department, as such departments are duty bound to verify the impact of removal of sand before auction of the lease hold rights. Unfortunately no such enquiry was sought before calling for the tender. The conditions of the tender notice do not disclose the quantity of sand available in the reaches sought to be auctioned and their permissive limits. Unfortunately no such enquiry was sought before calling for the tender. The conditions of the tender notice do not disclose the quantity of sand available in the reaches sought to be auctioned and their permissive limits. In the absence of such particulars the tender notice itself is contrary to law and liable to be set aside. In such circumstances, the writ petitioners approached this Court praying for appropriate reliefs. 9. The fifth respondent had sworn to the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 5. It is stated that basing on the feasibility report given by the Ground Water Department vide their Memo No.7408/Hg-II/05, dated 01.078.2007 of the Director of Ground Water, Hyderabad and in accordance with Lr.R.C.No.456/Hg/2006, dated 01.08.2007 of the Deputy Director of Ground Water Department, Kadapa, and also with the approval of the District Level Sand Committee, Kadapa, the fifth respondent's office had issued notification of auctioning of sand duly inviting applications for open auction and sealed Tenders vide notification No.534/Sand/2007-08, dated 26.10.2007. The Deputy Director of Ground Water Department, Kadapa vide their letter R.C.No.456/Hg/2006, dated 31.12.2007, has stated that the provisions of the Act were observed thoroughly while studying the feasibility of sand quarry of Venkaiah Kalva-I, Venkaiah Kalva-II and Bedadur (V) in Chitravati river bed, by the technical committee members consisting of Ground Water Department, and Mines and Geology Department and no deviation is noticed. A copy of the technical committee report had been produced before this Court. 10. As per the observation of Ground Water Department it is submitted that the water level observed during the survey in the month of May 2007 was ranging from 8.0 to 10.0 Mts bgl in Chitravati river, and in that area the water levels in monsoon were reported to be ranging from 4.00 to 6.00 Mts. 11. It is also stated that as per the Technical Committee Report the thickness of sand covered measured during the investigation in Chitravati River is 16 Mts and there is a possibility for rejuvenation of sand. Hence, the thickness of the sand is not less than 2.0 M, as alleged by the petitioners. 12. The Technical Committee has thoroughly observed the provisions of the Act during the surveys and found three reaches feasible for sand quarry in Chitravati river bed in Kondapuram Mandal. Hence, the thickness of the sand is not less than 2.0 M, as alleged by the petitioners. 12. The Technical Committee has thoroughly observed the provisions of the Act during the surveys and found three reaches feasible for sand quarry in Chitravati river bed in Kondapuram Mandal. Hence, after obtaining feasibility report under the Act from the Ground Water Department, the office of the fifth respondent had issued the impugned notification with the approval of the District Level Sand Committee. 13. It is also stated that there is a provision to approach the Director of Miens and Geology/Government to file an appeal/revision under Rules 35 and 35A of the A.P.M.M.C.Rules 1966. The petitioners, without availing the effective alternative remedy, have straight away approached this Court. 14. It is further stated that Section 27 of the Act and Rule 23 of the Rules are not contravened. The villages of Venkaiah Kalva and Bedadur are not notified as over exploited villages. After obtaining Technical report from the Ground Water Department and after approval of the District Level Sand Committee, the office of the fifth respondent had issued the impugned notification. In response to the impugned notification, the fifth respondent's office had received 26 applications i.e., 7 applications for Venkaiah Kalva-I, 12 applications for Venkaiah Kalva-II and 7 applications for Bedadur. 15. In the reply affidavit filed by the petitioners, it is stated that in para 3 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is categorically stated that the petitioners are residents of the villages adjacent to the river and primarily depending on the ground water for drinking water and irrigation purposes. It is also stated that there is no other source of water supply to the villages adjoining the river and that the villagers are entirely depending on the ground water. As per Rule 23(4) of the Rules, the permission to quarry sand shall not be granted within 500 mtrs of any ground water extraction structures either for irrigation or drinking water purposes. It is further stated that within 200 mtrs from Venkaiah Kalva Reach.II towards upstream, there is Rural Water Supply Scheme through bore wells, which was established with the grant given by the Government under the name of Rural Water Supply Bedaduru Kothapalle. The population of the village is about 500. It is further stated that within 200 mtrs from Venkaiah Kalva Reach.II towards upstream, there is Rural Water Supply Scheme through bore wells, which was established with the grant given by the Government under the name of Rural Water Supply Bedaduru Kothapalle. The population of the village is about 500. There is a water scheme in the name of Rural Water Scheme, Kothapalle, after Venkaiah Kalva Reach, in down stream. The Rural Water Scheme is 150 mtrs away from Venkaiah Kalva Reach.II. The water is being supplied to Ustikayalapalli village. The population of the said village is about 1000. The distance between the reaches and the bore wells is less than 100 mtrs down stream of Reach.II. The Rural Water Supply Scheme to supply water to Bedaduru Village is adjacent to Bedaduru Reach, which is about 50 mtrs of upstream of sand reach. The water is being supplied to Bedaduru Village, having population of 1000 and the villagers are depending on the bore wells for their drinking water and domestic purposes. Similarly, Yenamala Chinthala Rural Water Supply Scheme is 250 mtrs away from upstream of Bedaduru Reach. The population of the village is 1000. The water scheme is depending on the bore wells dug in the river. The Rural Water Scheme Pottipadu is between Venkaiah Kalva Reach Nos.I & II. The distance between Rural Water Supply and reaches is about 1000 mtrs from Reach.I and 150 mtrs from Reach.II. The population of the village is about 2000. The villagers are depending on the bore wells dug in the river. Chavva Nagayapalli Rural Water Supply Scheme is 300 mtrs from Bedaduru Reach upstream. The population of the village is about 500. R.W.S Venkayyakalva is 50 mtrs upstream to sand Reach.I and less than 500 mtrs from Reach.II. The water pipelines are laid in two meters depth on the sand line. The water is being drawn from the borewells dug by the Government. If the sand is excavated, water pipelines which are under the beneath of sand would be exposed and disturb the water supply system to the villages under the scheme. 16. It is also stated that the Government dug the bore wells in the river by granting funds. In respect of villages B. Kothapalle and Ustikayalapalli three bore wells were dug, for each bore well Rs.35,000/- was granted vide proceedings Ref.No.160/AEE1/PMA/OH, dated 12.07.2005. 16. It is also stated that the Government dug the bore wells in the river by granting funds. In respect of villages B. Kothapalle and Ustikayalapalli three bore wells were dug, for each bore well Rs.35,000/- was granted vide proceedings Ref.No.160/AEE1/PMA/OH, dated 12.07.2005. Whereas in respect of Chennamanenipalli, Bedaduru and Chennavanagayapalli villages, the District Collector, Kadapa vide Ref.No.D5/408/2005, dated 29.08.2005, allotted funds of Rs.2,00,000/-, Rs.1,50,000/- and Rs.1,40,000/- respectively for augmentation of Public Water Scheme (P.W.S). So far as Paluru and Pattipadu Villages are concerned, vide proceedings dated 18.02.2006 the Superintending Engineer, R.W.S, Kadapa released grant of Rs.40,000/- and Rs.45,000/- to dug bore wells. So far as Venkaiah Kalva, S.Thimmapuram, B.Kothapalli and S.Thimmapuram Villages etc., are concerned to dug bore wells, the funds were earmarked and released through Z.P. Funds to improve the Public Water Scheme vide Ref.No.N2/3022/04, dated 31.11.2004. The proceedings referred to above and on con-joint reaching of all these proceedings at B. Kothapalli, bore wells were dug and thereafter the scheme was improved by Z.P. funds by laying pipes etc. The schemes under Venkaiah Kaluva, P.Anantapuram and Bedadur villages were started by allotting the funds by proceedings in Ref.No.D5/408/2005, dated 30.04.2005. In the above said proceedings and also on various dates, bore wells were dug to provide drinking water to the villages on either side of the river. Apart from that, under R.W.S. Scheme and P.W.S. Scheme for irrigation purposes hundreds of bore wells were dug in the river. In view of that the impugned proceedings issued by the respondents to quarry the sand is contrary to the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. As such the impugned proceedings are liable to be set aside. 17. It is further stated that the above facts clinchingly establish that the action sought to be taken in pursuance of the Tender Notice dated 26.10.2007 is contrary to Rule 23(4) of the Rules, as all the bore wells were dug to supply drinking water to the villages, which are situated adjacent to the reaches sought to be auctioned to quarry the sand or with 500 mtrs thereof. If such sand is quarried, it would be detrimental to the interest of the adjacent villages as well as rural water supply scheme. Apart from that more than 1000 bore wells have been dug in the river for supplying drinking water to the villages. If such sand is quarried, it would be detrimental to the interest of the adjacent villages as well as rural water supply scheme. Apart from that more than 1000 bore wells have been dug in the river for supplying drinking water to the villages. If the sand is allowed to be quarried, the ground water would be deteriorated and it would affect the drinking water and irrigation needs of the people. 18. These are the respective stands taken by the parties. 19. The Statement showing the particulars of recommended sand reaches had been placed before this Court and the same reads as hereunder: 20. The proceeding, dated 07.06.2007, addressed by the Deputy Director, Groundwater Department, Kadapa to the Director, Groundwater Department, Hyderabad, had also been placed before this Court, which reads as hereunder: "GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH GROUND WATER DEPARTMENT From Sri U. Ramachandrudu, M. Sc., Deputy Director, The Director, Groundwater Department, To Groundwater Department, Hyderabad. Lr.Rc.No.456/Hg/06, Dt:7-6-2007 Sir, Sub:- Groundwater Department - Kadapa - Groundwater surveys for selection of sand quarries in Chitravathi river of Kondapuram Mandal - Submission of Technical Committee report for approval- Regarding. Ref:- Asst. Director Mines & Geology, Kadapa, Lr.No.534/Sand/07 Dt.12-4-2007