1. The petition is taken out by the petitioner, seeking below mentioned reliefs and directions:
"34(B) YOUR LORDSHIP may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order of direction and thereby be pleased to direct the respondent nos.4 and 5 to open E-Royalty Account No.QL 1401005815 of the petitioner no.1 and QL 1401030015 of the petitioner no.2.
34(C) YOUR LORDSHIP may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order of direction and thereby be pleased to direct the respondent no.1 to make necessary inquiry in pursuance to the representation dated 13.07.2011 made by the petitioner no.1 against the officers of the respondent nos.4 and 5 mentioned in the said representation for the incident of 09.07.2011, which took place at the quarry of the petitioners and thereafter to take necessary action against the said officers."
2. From the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner and the request mentioned in the petition, it appears that the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of respondents of not issuing E-Royalty Passes. The petitioner also appears to be aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents of not considering his representation.
3. When the petition is called out and taken up for hearing, learned AGP has tendered a copy of the order dated 16.6.2012, which, according to the learned AGP, has been forwarded to the petitioner by post (RPAD). On perusal of the said order dated 16.6.2012, it appears that the Collector, Panchmahals, has, vide said order dated 16.6.2012, terminated/cancelled the lease, i.e. quarry lease granted in favour of the petitioner. In view of the said order dated 16.6.2012, the grievance made in the petition would now not survive since the lease has been terminated.
4. If at all, the petitioner feels aggrieved by the decision, i.e. the order dated 16.6.2012, then as mentioned in the said order dated 16.6.2012, the petitioner can take out appropriate proceedings before the competent authority, i.e. by filing a revision application before the Deputy Secretary.
5. Since the said order dated 16.6.2012, whereby the quarry lease granted in favour of the present petitioner has been terminated, is passed, now the petition is disposed of.
6. It is clarified that present order will not stand in way of the petitioner, if the petitioner takes out any proceedings before appropriate forum and such forum/authority will independently decide the proceedings on merits and in accordance with law but after hearing the petitioner. Since the petition has become infructuous in view of the order dated 16.6.2012, it is accordingly disposed of. Copy of the said order dated 16.6.2012 is retained on the record.
(K.M.
Thaker, J.) Bharat* Top