1 4 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 184/2004. Prithvi Raj & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order :: 13th January 2009. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI None present for the petitioners. Mr. Arjun Singh Rathore, Government Counsel. ..... BY THE COURT: In this matter, the counsel earlier appearing for the petitioners pleaded no instructions on 16.04.2007 and in the circumstances of the case, the Court directed issuance of notices to the petitioners. Though served with the notice of information, nobody has put in appearance for the petitioners. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, record has been examined. This writ petition was submitted as back as on 15.01.2004 essentially seeking to question the notice dated 12.09.2003 (Annex. 3) inviting offers for the work of mechanical cutting of forests as issued by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Suratgarh. The petitioners attempted to submit that the Forest Department has taken over illegal possession of the fields belonging to them and beyond the land that was acquired; and prayed for the relief that the said notice inviting offers dated 12.09.2003 be quashed and the non-petitioners be directed not to cut-down the trees available 2 on the khatedari land of the petitioners. The respondents have pointed out in their reply that the submissions as made by the petitioners are not correct; that the plantation in question was carried out by the Forest Department in the year 1978 and looking to the interest of the development of the trees and increasing number of trees, under the Scheme of 2003-04, it was decided to cut-down the trees that had grown up sufficiently. It has also been stated that the area of plantation has been marked as protected forest and it has been decided to make new plantation after cutting down the old trees. It has also been stated that the petition involves disputed questions of facts. The respondents seem to be correct in their submissions that the petition involves essentially the disputed questions of fact about location of the trees in question. It is seen that the notices in this writ petition were ordered to be issued on 16.04.2004 without any interim order. Neither there appears any cause surviving for consideration in this writ petition nor there appears any reason to consider the disputed questions of fact in this writ petition. With their omission to appear despite service of notices, it appears that the petitioners have lost their interest in prosecuting this writ petition. 3 The petition stands dismissed. (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J Mohan/