1 D.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.253/2004 (Sumit Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.) Date: 15.05.2006 HON'BLE MR. RAJESH BALIA,J. HON'BLE MR. R.P.VYAS,J. Mr.T.S.Champawat, for the petitioner. Mr.B.N.Kalla, for the respondent No.5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. We are of opinion that there is no specific averments identifying that the land which was reserved as Gochar land at the time when the quarry licence was sanctioned vide Annex. R/1 in favour of the respondent No.6. The very foundation for bringing this lis as public interest litigation fails when during the course of the arguments it was conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that all lands allotted in favour of respondent No.6 as on the date when the quarry licence was issued, were recorded either as Govt. land or of the private Khatedari but no part of it was not recorded as Gochar Land. Moreover, it has been pointed out by the respondents that during the pendency of writ petition both Annex. R/1 & R/2, the very impugned quarry licences have been cancelled and the order of cancellation has been subjected to challenge by the licensees before the court, which petitions are pending. 2 In view of the aforesaid, we are of the opinion that the principal cause of action itself has come to an end and matter of cancelling licence is pending consideration in separate petition challenging the said order, wherein all objections may be raised. Hence, no cause survives for proceeding with this petition as PIL. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. (R.P.VYAS),J. (RAJESH BALIA),J. Arti