LPA No.224 of 2009(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 224 of 2009(O&M) Date of decision 14 .7.2009 Gajanand etc. .. Appellants Versus State of Haryana etc. ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Mani Ram,Advocate for the appellants Ms. Ritu Bahri, DAG Haryana for respondent Nos. 1,2 and 4 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement ? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. This appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgement dated 27.1.2009 passed by a learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. The learned Single Judge has noticed the prayer of the petitioners for issuance of a writ of prohibition to stop mining operations in the area of village Mai Khurd. The mining rights have been given by the respondent- State of Haryana to the Contractor. In response to a legal notice issued by the appellant to the contractor, it was pointed out that he was carrying out mining operation in terms of the law and the rights conferred on him. He, however, urged that there was no violation of any law. We have heard Mr. Mani Ram Verma, learned counsel for the appellants and asked him to point out from the petition any factual LPA No.224 of 2009(O&M) 2 averment showing violation of any provisions of the law. However, he has remained unable to show any specific averment alleging violation of any provision of law. The petition is full of vague averments which are general in nature. Ms. Ritu Bahri, learned State Counsel has pointed out that the State of Haryana has given lease rights of mining to the Contractor and the mining is in progress as per the requirements of law. In view of the above we are of the considered view that no interference of this Court would be warranted in the order dated 27.1.2009 particularly when we find that the petitioner has no case on merits. There is no averments alleging violation of any law, rule or regulations. The appeal is wholly mis-conceived and the same is liable to be dismissed. For the reasons afore-mentioned this appeal fails and the same is dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Jaswant Singh) 14.7.2009 Judge okg