D.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5840/2005 Mangi Lal v State & ors. Date of order : 24.03.2008 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI ... Mr. M.C.Bhoot for the petitioner Mr. N.M.Lodha, Addl. Advocate General Heard Mr. M.C.Bhoot, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N.M.Lodha, Additional Advocate General for the State. It appears that the petitioner being apprehensive that a mining lease is going to be granted in favour of a high-up in violation of the provisions of the Forest Conservation Act, this PIL application was filed. The matter came up for admission and this Court restrained the respondents from granting any mining lease in the area in question, and at the same time operation of the notice given by the Tehsildar was also directed to be stayed. The matter was again taken up for filing of reply of the State. According to the reply of the State no lease was ever considered or granted in favour of an individual in the area in question which virtually fell in forest area. According to the petitioner also neither any appeal is pending nor any application for grant of lease is pending before the Government. It appears from the materials on record that the Forest Department keeping in view the provisions of Forest Conservation - 2 - Act refused to grant No Objection Certificate. From the materials on record thus it appears that the apprehension of the petitioner is now wholly misconceived. Learned counsel for the petitioner however submitted that in view of the notice given by the Tehsildar as contained in Annexures 19 and 21, the State Government may take steps again to grant lease to some interested persons. We are satisfied from the materials on record that no lease application is pending before the Government nor any body has applied afresh for grant of lease and thus nothing remains to be decided in this PIL application. On mere apprehension of the petitioner the Court should not issue any direction. It is settled that the lands falling in forest area ordinarily are not settled for lease for mining operations unless No Objection Certificate is granted by the Forest Department. The notice issued by the Tehsildar to the Forest Department however would be of no consequence in view of the refusal to grant No Objection Certificate by the Forest Department. In view of the aforesaid reasons, therefore, we find no reason to interfere in this PIL application. However it will be open to the parties to raise the matter in case they will have some cause of action in future. This PIL application is accordingly dismissed. (MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI ) J. (NARAYAN ROY),C.J. mathur/