IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1992 of 2010 (M/S) M/S Parvatiya Mineral Industry, Tapovan District Tehri Garhwal through its Partner Sri Rajendra Singh Bhandari .. Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & another … Respondents Mr. B.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Shah, Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents. (Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J.) Heard Mr. B.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. N.P. Shah, Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents. By means of this petition the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to carry on the mining operation within the area described in Part-I of the renewed mining lease deed dated 31-08-2001. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has contended that despite of the direction given by the Principal Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand dated 29-07-2009, no decision has been taken by the Collector Tehri Garhwal/respondent No.2, while the Principal Secretary had given this direction in view of the judgment of this Court passed in PIL No.908 (M/B) of 2002, Sri Ram Murti Sridhar and others versus State of Uttarakhand and others dated 20-06-2006. In view of these facts the petitioner is given liberty to make a representation to the Collector Tehri Garhwal, annexing the copy of letter of Principal Secretary (Annexure No.9 to the writ petition) and may take all grounds raised in the writ petition. The respondent No.2 is also directed to a decision on the representation of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of presentation of the representation along with certified copy of this order and the letter 2 dated 29-7-2008 of the Principal Secretary, as well as the order of renewal of lease deed. With the aforesaid direction the writ petition is disposed of finally. Dated: 24-11-2010 (B.S. Verma, J. ) ISB