ARVIND TIWARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner at the initial stage submits that he withdraws the prayer No.(iii) and (iv) of the writ petition.

(2.) I have considered the submissions, the petitioner in the writ petition has prayed as under:-

(3.) From the perusal of the aforesaid prayers, it is apparent that the petitioner on one hand has been praying for creating an Eco Sensitive Zone in and around Kaila Devi Wildlife Sanctuary and at the same time he has prayed for directing the Mining Department to extend the lease period of petitioner equal to the period when the mining operation remained closed due to the Court's order. Thus, a conclusion can be drawn that the mining operations being conducted by the petitioner, are in and around the wildlife sanctuary, and this petition is essentially questioning the method and manner of keeping the matter pending before this Court relating to creating of Eco Sensitive Zone and till Eco Sensitive Zone shall be created. The petitioner, who is now praying for withdrawal of prayers No.3 and 4 cannot pray for extending the lease period.