D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.790/2008 Gulam Mohammed Vs. Union of India & Ors. Date of Order :: September 16, 2008. HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Sudhir Kumar Tewari for the appellant(s). Mr. B.L. Avasthi, Addl.Govt.Counsel for respondent(s). *** This appeals seeks to challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 13.9.2006 whereby the writ petition of the appellant was dismissed. The appellant filed the writ petition challenging the rejection of his application for grant of mining lease. The respondents rejected the said application on the ground that he failed to remove the deficiencies pointed out by them and also on account of some irregularities committed by the appellant during the period of earlier lease. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that in response of the respondents' objection that the appellant should submit the certificate issued by the Forest Department to the effect that land of the mining lease applied for as on date did not fall in the forest area. In fact, such No-objection Certificate as also the No-objection certificate issued by the irrigation department was already submitted. -2- Reference is made to the No-objection certificates dated 21.11.1992, 23.9.2002, 28.3.1990 issued by the Irrigation Department, Gram Panchayat and Forest Department respectively. In course of the arguments, learned counsel sought to produce the fresh certificates of no-objection obtained from all these authorities and argued that the case of the appellant should now be considered by the respondents afresh. We are afraid, this cannot be done now before this Court because the learned Single Judge, in the impugned order itself, has granted liberty to again apply for mining lease in accordance with law and the appellant should approach the concerned authorities for that purpose. No- objection certificates relied on by the appellant, which were earlier produced, did not pertain to the period when the lease deed was applied for and they were not specific on the question as to if the area did not fall within the forest land. The respondents were, therefore, justified in requiring the appellant to furnish the updated No-objection certificates. In view of the above, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge, This appeal is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J. (NARAYAN ROY),CJ. Skant/-