IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 6050 of 2010. Date of decision: 18.11.2010 Mast Ram & ors. …. Petitioners Versus State of H.P.& ors. ….. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sanjay Karol, J. Whether approved for reporting ? No For the petitioner: Mr.Ramakant Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Shri Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy.Advocate General, for respondents No.1,2,4 to 11. Mr.Anil Chauhan, counsel for respondent No.3. _____________________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) The main grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent-State is illegally trying to grant mining lease in Maseh Khad. Reply to the petition has been filed by the State. The preliminary submission raised by the State in its reply is as under:- “That the present writ petition is premature and the petitioners have no cause of action for filing and maintaining the present Writ Petition merely on the apprehensions. It is submitted that M/s.Bhagwati Stone 2 Crusher has applied for grant of mining lease for the extraction of Sand, Stone & Bajri, for the installation of stone crusher over an area measuring 5-34-29 Hects. (private land) comprising Khasra Nos.1, 13B & 449 falling in Mauza Kohala, Tehsil Nadaun, District Hamirpur. The letter for joint inspection of the area for the grant of mining lease and site of the stone crusher have been sent to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nadaun & Dehra, the Chairman of the Joint Inspection Committee on 21.4.2010 respectively. The Joint Inspection Report of the area applied for grant of mining lease & stone crusher site is still awaited. As such neither the permission for mining lease nor the permission to set up stone crusher has been accorded in favour of M/s.Bhagwati Stone Crusher, Village & Post Office Peer Saluhi, Tehsil Dehra, District Kangra and the matter is still under process. Therefore, the said petition filed by the petitioners is premature and deserves to be dismissed in the interest of justice.” In view of the preliminary submission raised by the State, we dispose of this petition with a direction that the Joint Inspection Committee shall associate all the petitioners before submitting its report and if necessary, shall again visit the site alongwith the petitioners who may point out their objections to the grant of such lease. The petitioners may produce a copy of this order before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nadaun and Sub Divisional Magistrate, Dehra who are stated to be the Chairmen of the Joint Inspection Committee. In case the Joint 3 Inspection Committee has still not visited the spot, it shall visit the spot after fixing a date and giving an opportunity to the petitioner to be present at the spot. In case the Joint Inspection Committee has already visited the site then the petitioners can point out their objections to the President of the Joint Inspection Committee who may, if they so feel, again visit the spot. Needless to say, if the Joint Inspection Committee recommends the grant of mining lease, the petitioners shall have a right to approach this Court again. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. Dasti copy. (Deepak Gupta) Judge November 18, 2010 (Sanjay Karol) (m) Judge