- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) The present litigation has long chequered history. The petitioner is claiming that a quarry license was granted to the petitioner for plot No. 83 as back as in 1956. According to the petitioner, license was renewed from time to time and presently, the license is valid upto 31-12-2009. It is also submitted that vide order dated 5-2-1980, plot area of the petitioner's plot was increased to 12758 square feet.
(3.) Teja Ram, father of respondent No. 8 had quarry license for plot No. 75 measuring 140 x 190 feet. According to the petitioner, said Teja Ram became hostile against the petitioner and started creating obstruction in the working of petitioner on plot No. 83. Teja Ram also preferred an appeal before the Additional Director of Mines against the extension of area licensed to the petitioner but the same was dismissed vide order dated 4-1-1982. Appeal against the order dated 4-1-1982 was dismissed by State Government on 8-2-1984. The revision petition filed against the aforesaid orders before the Government of India was also dismissed vide order dated 25-9-1985. Not satisfied with all these orders, said Teja Ram preferred writ petition before this Court being S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2489/1985 which was also dismissed vide order dated 11-2-1986. Not only this, Teja Ram also filed a suit in the Court of Munsif, Makrana challenging the extension of the area covered by the quarry license of the petitioner but this suit was withdrawn by Teja Ram by saying that he has filed revision petition to the Central Government. The civil suit was, therefore, dismissed as withdrawn on 16-5-1985.;