JUDGMENT : 1. We are informed that 12 earlier writ petitions relating to the same project and some of them allegedly involving same or similar questions were filed by different petitioners and have been dismissed by the High Courts and a few of them also by this Court. Sh. Shanti Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that none of those earlier matters was in a representative capacity inasmuch as leave of the Court was not obtained to pursue those matters in representative capacity. We find that in the present case also no leave was granted by the High Court permitting the petitioner to pursue the matter in representative capacity. This may, by itself, be a sufficient reason not to entertain this special leave petition. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an appropriate application seeking leave to pursue the matter in representative capacity would be filed in this Court in order to challenge the High Court's order dismissing the petitioner's writ petition. The SLP is, therefore, adjourned to 2nd May, 1997.