Judgment :- Common Order: 1. The orders challenged in these cases are that of the District Collector, the first respondent herein, dated 11. 2008 rejecting the request of the petitioners for the purpose of extending the period of stone quarrying for another five years as per the amended Rule 8(8) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. 2. In W.P.No.27030 of 2008, the petitioner was granted lease for quarrying rough stone jelly in respect of Government poramboke land in survey No.102/6 (part 5) to the extent of 3.00.0 hectares, Gajjelnaickenpatty village, Salem taluk and District for a period of five years from 20.10.2003. 3. Likewise, in W.P.No.27571 of 2008, the petitioner was granted rough stone quarry lease in respect of Government poramboke land in survey No.102/6 (part 4) to an extent of 3.00.0 hectares in Gajjelnaickenpatty village, Salem taluk and the lease was entered into on 211. 2003 for a period of five years. 4. In view of the amendment to Rule 8(8) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959, in respect of virgin quarry viz., quarrying operation granted for the first time, the parties are entitled to have 10 year period of lease. Therefore, the case of the petitioners in these writ petitions is that the quarrying operations in respect of which lease was granted by the Collector are virgin quarry and the lease was granted for the first time and therefore, by virtue of the amendment, the petitioners are entitled to continue the quarrying operations for another five years after completion of five years originally granted in 2003. 5. It is the clear case of the petitioners that what was granted to them was virgin quarry and not an existing quarry. However, the first respondent, District Collector filed counter affidavit wherein, while admitting the fact of grant of licence and also that the petitioners were the highest bidders based on which the lease was given and that the lease originally granted for five years expired in October, 2008, the first respondent has no way chosen to substantiate that the survey numbers in respect of which the quarry licence was granted were existing quarries. Except a bald denial that what was given was not a virgin quarry, there are no particulars available in the counter affidavit and no documents are also produced to show that before 2003, the same lands were granted lease to third parties for quarrying operations. In the absence of any material to be placed before this Court, it is not possible to accept the mere denial made by the first respondent in the counter affidavit that the lands were existing quarries. 6. In similar circumstances, the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.287 of 2006, etc. batch cases, by judgment dated 24. 2008, after taking note of the fact that besides the bald denial by the respondent Collector to the effect that what was granted was not virgin quarry, no documents were produced to substantiate the stand and also in the absence of any appreciable evidence to show that the lands were already granted quarry lease to third parties, set aside the orders denying extension of lease period with direction to the petitioners to approach the Government to establish that they are entitled to the grant of lease for a further period of five years. Following the same, especially in the circumstances that in the counter affidavit there is no material available to establish the case of the respondents, there is no difficulty to conclude that the contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioners that what was granted to the petitioners was only virgin quarry is certainly sustainable. 7. In view of the same, the impugned orders of the District Collector dated 011. 2008, stand set aside and the District Collector, Salem, first respondent herein, is directed to pass fresh orders not only after giving opportunity to the petitioners, but also by placing reliance on acceptable documents showing that the lands were not existing quarries and such orders shall be passed by the District Collector expeditiously in any event within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The writ petitions therefore stand disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.