Judgment J.B. Pardiwala, J.—Rule. Learned AGP Mrs. Pathak waives service of rule. 2. As the issue is in a very narrow compass, the matter is taken-up for final hearing today with the consent of the respective parties. 3. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the following relief’s :— “(A) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondent no.2 to decide the case of the petitioner as per order dated 28.07.2005 passed by the Additional Director, Geology and Mining, Gujarat State in Appeal No.264 of 2004 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the writ; (B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the request, if any, made by the petitioner for granting ad-hoc permits/parvana for mining of sand; (C) Ad-interim relief in terms of prayer (B) above may kindly be granted; (D) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant such other and further relief and/or order in the interest of justice in favour of the petitioner.” 4. Short facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition can be summarised as under:— 1. The petitioner, vide application dated 3rd February 2003, prayed for grant of permission for mining of sand. 2. The subject is governed by the Gujarat Minor Minerals Rules, 1966. 3. It appears that the authority, vide order dated 23rd July 2003, sanctioned the quarry lease for three years in respect of the area situated opposite to Survey No. 703A and 703B of village Adajan, admeasuring 3-82-hectares. 4. Thereafter, vide order dated 18th August 2004, the Collector cancelled the lease of the petitioner on the ground of breach of conditions of the lease deed. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Collector cancelling the lease, the petitioner preferred appeal before the Additional Director. 6. The Additional Director, vide order dated 28th July 2005 (which is at Annexure-A to this petition), partly allowed the appeal by quashing the order of the Collector dated 18th August 2004 and remitted the matter to the Collector for fresh consideration on certain terms. 5. 6. The Additional Director, vide order dated 28th July 2005 (which is at Annexure-A to this petition), partly allowed the appeal by quashing the order of the Collector dated 18th August 2004 and remitted the matter to the Collector for fresh consideration on certain terms. 5. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though the order of remand passed by the respondent no.3 is dated 28th July 2005, till this date no steps have been taken by the Collector in this regard and the directions issued by the appellate authority have not been complied with. The petitioner seeks appropriate directions in this regard. 6. It is very unfortunate that inspite of clear directions in the order of the appellate authority dated 28th July 2005, no steps have been taken by the Collector even after a period of five years in this regard. 7. My attention is drawn to few representations which have been preferred in this regard by the petitioner from time to time to the Collector, Surat. However, inspite of all these, the Collector has failed to pass appropriate orders as per the order of the appellate authority dated 28th July 2005. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit and proper to dispose of this petition by issuing the following directions :— 1. The Collector, Surat is hereby directed to issue notice to the petitioner within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the order, fixing the date of hearing of the matter in question and in terms of the order of remand passed by the appellate authority dated 28th July 2005 in Appeal No. 264/2004. 2. The Collector, Surat shall hear the petitioner in this regard and also take into consideration the operative part of the appellate authority’s order dated 28th July 2005 and decide the entire matter afresh by passing appropriate order in this regard in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter. 9. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. P P P P P