Judgment :- 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners had submitted that he would approach the competent authority, under Section 30 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development), Act, 1957, by filing a revision. However, with regard to the aspect of delay in approaching the authority concerned, he had submitted that he would file an application for condoning the delay stating that it had been caused due to the pendency of the writ petition before this Court, in W.P.No.7767 of 2006. 3. The learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents have no objection for this Court permitting the petitioners to approach the competent authority, as prayed for by the petitioners. 4. In view of the said submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners, as well as the respondents, the writ petition stands dismissed, on the ground of the availability of the alternate remedy of revision, under Section 30 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development), Act, 1957. It is also made clear that if the petitioner files such a Revision Petition before the competent authority, as per Section 30 of the said Act, within a period of fifteen days from today, along with an application for condoning the delay, the revisional authority concerned shall consider the same, in view of the pendency of the writ petition before this Court, in W.P.No.7767 of 2006 and the Revision Petition filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.