ORDER 1. We have heard learned Additional Solicitor-General, Mr Rohtagi for the State of Orissa in IA No.2, Mr Dave, learned Senior Counsel in support of IA No. 1 and Mr Shanti Bhushan, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent. Having heard all of them, all that we can say is that Our observations in para 50 of the judgment in Ferro Alloys Corpn. Ltd. v. Union of India1 (SCC at p. 180) regarding the availability of 436.295 hectares out of 1261.476 hectares will not in any way be construed to be pre-empting any decision of the High Court of Orissa in the pending writ petition i.e. OJC No. 1830 of 1999. Our observations as above are without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties before the High Court in the aforesaid pending writ petition. 2. So far as Our observation regarding the appointment of the Dash Committee is concerned, it has been pointed out that the Dash Committee is already superseded. The said Committee is substituted by another committee consisting of (i) the Principal Secretary, Department of Steel and Mines, Government of Orissa; (ii) the Director of Mines; and (iii) the Deputy Controller, Indian Bureau of Mines. Therefore, Our observations regarding the consideration to be made by the Dash Committee will now be read as referring to the Committee constituted as above. IAs are disposed of accordingly. Unregistered IAs (two in number) filed on behalf of Orissa Mining Corporation 3. So far as these IAs are concerned, they do not fall within the scope of the present proceedings before us. Whatever legal rights the applicants may 9 have are kept open. These IAs are disposed of accordingly.