CWP No.1355 of 2005. 24.3.2008. Present: Mr.Vikas Rajput, counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy.A.G. for the respondents No.1 to 3 and 5. Mr.Baldev Singh, counsel for respondent No.4. On 12th September, 2006 counsel for the petitioner had made a statement to this Court that the petitioner intends to apply to the competent authority for permission in terms of Section 118 of the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972. He was permitted to make the application. The application was not made within time granted by this Court and vide order dated 19.12.2006 the petitioner was granted two weeks’ further time to file such an application. This Court had directed that in case such an application is filed to the competent authority on or before 8th January, 2007 the same shall be decided by the State Government on or before 9th April, 2007. We have now been informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the application was made and the same stands rejected. However, he is unable to give the date of rejection. The rejection of the application gives a fresh cause of action to the petitioner. The petition is, therefore, rejected with liberty to the petitioner to file fresh petition challenging the order of rejection of the application filed by him for grant of permission in terms of Section 118 of the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act. We may however clarify, that the petitioner in the fresh proceedings, if any filed by him, shall be at liberty to raise all points raised in the present writ petition also. ( Deepak Gupta),J. March 24, 2008. ( Rajiv Sharma ),J. PV