IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1611 of 2008 M/s Diamond and Gem Development Corporation Ltd. … Petitioner. Vs. State of Uttarakhand and six others. …Respondents. Mr. Sharad Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, Brief Holder, learned counsel for the respondent No.1to 5 &7. Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Geeta Parihar, Advocate, learned counsel for respondent No. 6. Date July 19, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. (Misc. Application No. 5725 of 2010) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief:- 1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 30-4-2007 passed by respondent no.5. 2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the said decision/proposal of land use change taken by respondent no. 4 in the Meeting dated 17-8-2006 at Annexure-16 of this writ petition. 3. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 not to hamper the development work of the Haldwani Gem Park for unwarranted reasons. 4. Issue any other such further orders or directions, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner. By means of Miscellaneous Application No. 5725 of 2010, the petitioner has prayed to direct the controlling authority to decide the Misc. Appeal No. 52/108 of 2007 within a stipulated period. The appeal is pending since the year 2007. 2 Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, learned Brief Holder appearing for the State-respondents has no objection if a direction is given to the controlling authority to decide the appeal. Learned Senior Advocate, Mr. Sharad Sharma appearing for the petitioner has contended that liberty be also given to the petitioner to press relief No. 2 of the writ petition after passing of order by the appellate authority, i.e. controlling authority. In view of above, the controlling authority is directed to expedite the proceeding of the Miscellaneous Appeal No. 52/108 of 2007 and the controlling authority shall take a decision thereon preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. With the said direction the writ petition is disposed of. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to press second relief, if cause of action still survives after the decision of controlling authority. Till the decision is taken by the controlling authority, the parties shall maintain status-quo in respect of the land in question, but the petitioner shall neither alienate and part with the land nor create any third party interest with respect thereto nor raise any construction thereupon. Miscellaneous Application No. 5725 of 2010 also stands disposed of. (B.S.Verma,J.) RCP