Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 845 (AP)

P. Ratnalatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2020-12-21

AKULA VENKATA SESHA SAI

body2020
ORDER : Akula Venkata Sesha Sai, J. 1. In the present writ petition challenge is to the demand notice bearing No. 1133/RVS/2020, dated 07.11.2020, issued by the Assistant Director of Mines Geology, Visakhapatnam/2nd respondent herein demanding the petitioner to pay the total amount of Rs. 68,02,60,911/-. The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology vide show cause notice, dated 28.07.2020, directed the petitioner to show cause as to why the action should not be initiated against the alleged excavation and transportation of excess quantity of road metal and gravel. In response to the said show cause notice, the petitioner herein submitted a reply, dated 10.08.2020 wherein the petitioner requested the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology to furnish certain information and documents mentioned in the said reply. The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology issued a demand notice, dated 18.08.2020. Questioning the validity of the said demand notice, the petitioner herein approached this Court by way of filing W.P. No. 16423 of 2020. This Court, vide order, dated 15.09.2020, while setting aside the said demand notice, dated 18.08.2020, remitted the matter to the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology for fresh consideration after supplying the relevant records and reports and to pass appropriate orders. Subsequent to the disposal of the said writ petition, the petitioner herein submitted an additional reply, dated 02.11.2020, which was acknowledged by the office of the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology on 03.11.2020. In the said additional reply, the petitioner requested the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology to furnish the balance information as mentioned in the said reply and also requested to consider the said reply submitted earlier along with the additional reply and to drop further proceedings. Now, by way of the impugned demand notice, dated 07.11.2020, the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology demanded a sum of Rs. 68,02,60,911/-. Hence, the present writ petition. 2. Heard Sri. M. Radha Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. K. Naveen Kumar, learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for the respondents. 3. It is contended by Sri. Now, by way of the impugned demand notice, dated 07.11.2020, the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology demanded a sum of Rs. 68,02,60,911/-. Hence, the present writ petition. 2. Heard Sri. M. Radha Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. K. Naveen Kumar, learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for the respondents. 3. It is contended by Sri. M. Radha Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned demand notice, dated 07.11.2020 is highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and opposed to the very spirit of the object of the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 and also patent violation of the principles of natural justice. It is also the submission of the learned counsel that having received the explanation/reply and the additional reply, there is no justification on the part of the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology in observing that the petitioner herein did not file the reply within the stipulated period. 4. On the contrary, it is contended strenuously by the learned Government Pleader that there is neither illegality nor there exists any infirmity in the impugned action, and only after affording opportunity to the petitioner, the impugned demand notice came to be issued the same cannot be violated. 5. The information available before this Court manifestly discloses that in the earlier round of litigation in W.P. No. 16423 of 2020, learned single Judge of this Court vide order, dated 15.09.2020, while setting aside the earlier demand notice, dated 18.08.2020, remitted the matter to the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology for fresh consideration after supplying the relevant records and reports and to pass appropriate orders thereafter. A perusal of the demand notice impugned in the present writ petition discloses that subsequent to the said orders of this Court, the office of the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology furnished certain information vide letter, dated 09.10.2020. Admittedly, vide explanation, dated 02.11.2020, which was acknowledged by the office of the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology on 03.11.2020, the petitioner herein, while requesting the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology to furnish some more information, made a request to the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology to consider the interim reply submitted earlier along with the additional reply to drop further proceedings. But in the impugned demand notice, the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology observes that the lessee/petitioner herein failed to submit reply within the stipulated time. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology went wrong in observing so, obviously under the impression that in the additional explanation/reply the petitioner herein made a request only to furnish the balance information. Since the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology did not consider the earlier reply, dated 10.08.2020 and the additional reply, dated 02.11.2020 submitted by the petitioner, the impugned action is a patent violation of principles of natural justice and on this ground alone the matter is liable to be sent back to the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology for fresh consideration and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. It is also the submission of the learned Government Pleader that the petitioner herein may be directed to address a letter to the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology immediately, asking the particulars of the complete information required by the petitioner so that there can be quietus for the entire issue. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the Demand Notice No. 1133/RVS/2020, dated 07.11.2020 and the matter is remitted to the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Visakhapatnam/2nd respondent for fresh consideration and passing appropriate orders as per law and taking into account the observations made supra. It is also made clear that within a period of one week from the date of receipt of this order, the petitioner herein shall make an application to the office of the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology requesting complete information, which is relevant so as to enable the office of the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology to furnish the same. It is also made clear that only after furnishing the said information and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology shall pass appropriate orders. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.