AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Satya Poot Mehrotra and Rajesh Chandra, JJ.—The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia, praying for quashing the show cause notice dated 18.2.2003 (Annexure-15 to the writ petition) requiring the petitioner to show cause as to why the lease granted in favour of the petitioner be not cancelled. The further prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 11.12.2002 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) directing the petitioner to stop the mining operations.It appears that the petitioner was granted mining lease in respect of plot in question w.e.f. 30.1.1999 for a period of 5 years, i.e., up to 29.1.2004. By the order dated 10.3.2003 time was granted to the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 for filing counter-affidavit.
Counter-affidavit on behalf of the said respondents was filed on 3.7.2003.
It is noteworthy that no interim order was granted in favour of the petitioner in the writ petition.
From a perusal of the facts narrated above, it is evident that the period of lease granted to the petitioner expired on 29.1.2004. therefore, the present writ petition has become infructuous by lapse of time and the same is liable to be dismissed on the said ground. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as having become infructuous.