WP(C) 3249/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY The petitioner, by the present petition, has prayed for a direction to t he respondent authorities to issue mining permit one after another in respect of Bihubor Stone Quarry No. VII under Sivasagar Division with a further prayer to dispose of the representation dated 6.6.2011 filed by him. I have heard Mr. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr . Handique, learned State counsel appearing for the respondents. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that for the same stone quarry the authority is contemplating to issue mining permits to a number of applicants including the petitioner at a time and if such a course o f action is taken it may be difficult to operate such permit by all the persons at a time in respect of the same stone quarry. The learned counsel, therefore, s ubmits that the petition be disposed of directing the respondent authorities not to issue such permits to more than one person at a time and also to dispose of the representation dated 6.6.2011. Admittedly, the permit has been issued in the name of Nirmal Gogoi, who is not a party respondent in the present proceeding, in respect of the said ston e quarry for a period of 55 days. Such permit was issued on 2.6.2011. The petiti oner’s contention being that such permit should not be issued to more than one p erson at a time, no direction is required to be issued since the authority so fa r has issued the permit in respect of only one person and hence no direction can also be issued to dispose of the representation dated 6.6.2011. However, if suc h permits are issued to more than one person at a time and if the petitioner is aggrieved by such action, it is open to him to approach this Court again. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.