Judgment :- 1. The Petitioner has projected the present Writ of Mandamus praying for an issuance of an order by this Court in directing the Respondents to prescribe the period of lease as 10 years, by complying Rule 8(8) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, in respect of the virgin stone quarry measuring an extent of 5.00 hectares comprised in S.No.107 (Part) situated at Siruthamur Village, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram District. 2. According to the Petitioner, the First Respondent/District Collector, Kancheepuram issued a Notification in Na.Ka.No.777/ 2006/Q1 dated 30.08.2006 which was published in the Kancheepuram District Gazette dated 31.08.2006 thereby called for tender/acquaintance in respect of the stone quarries in Kancheepuram Taluk, Kancheepuram District. Out of 12 items, mentioned in the Gazette Notification, 10 items are virgin quarries. 3. The prime contention of the Petitioner is that as per Rule 8(8) of The Tamil Nadu Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 1959, the period of quarrying stone in respect of virgin area which have not been subject to quarrying earlier shall be 10 years and that the First Respondent in the Gazette notification fixed the period of lease for five years only quite contrary to the rules. 4. The Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner took part in the tender/auction and became a successful bidder in respect of the stone quarry measuring an extent of 5.00 hectares comprised in S.No.107 (Part) situated at Siruthamur Village, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram District. The quarrying was confirmed to the Petitioner for a sum of Rs.61,30,000/-and he paid 10% of the said amount namely, Rs.6,13,000/- on 20.09.2006 besides remitting a sum of Rs.25,000/-towards caution deposit. The remaining amount has to be paid within 7 days from the date of receipt of confirmation letter from the Respondents. 5. Continuing further, the Learned counsel for the Petitioner projects the argument that the Petitioner after remitting 10% of lease amount requesting the First Respondent to determine the lease period as 10 years because of the fact that the quarrying area is a virgin one and it will take minimum 3 years to start the quarrying operations. However, the Respondents have not acceded to the request of the Petitioner and they proposed to issue a confirmation letter fixing the lease period as 5 years. 6. However, the Respondents have not acceded to the request of the Petitioner and they proposed to issue a confirmation letter fixing the lease period as 5 years. 6. Per contra, the Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing the First and Second Respondents contends that a land comprised in S.No.107 (Part) is situated at Siruthamur Village, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram District and on verification, it is found that it has already been subject to quarrying at different points of time by the local people. Further more, in the District Gazette notification dated 30.10.2005, the said land has not been notified as virgin quarry, since the quarry has already been opened and exposed. Also, the First Respondent/District Collector, Kancheepuram in the notification dated 31.08.2006 has determined the period of lease for 5 years. 7. The Learned Additional Government Pleader for the First and Second Respondents submits that in the tender notification dated 31.08.2006, it has been clearly mentioned that duration of the lease period will be for 5 years only and the Petitioner after knowing fully well the terms and conditions of the lease, participated in the auction and he has been declared as successful bidder. When that be the fact situation, it is not open to the Petitioner to take altogether a different stand, contrary to the terms and conditions of the tender notification. 8. At this juncture, it is useful for this Court to make a reference to Rule 8(8) of The Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 Leasing of lands for quarrying minor minerals other than the minerals covered under Rules 8-A and 8-c of these Rules which runs hereunder: "The period of lease for quarrying stone in respect of the virgin areas, which have not been subjected to quarrying so far, shall be ten years. The period of lease for quarrying stone in respect of other areas shall be five years. The period of lease for quarrying sand and other minor minerals, other than the minerals covered under Rules 8-A and 8C of the said Rules, shall not exceed three years and shall not be less than one year and shall be subject to the following conditions, namely: (i) The date of commencement of the period of lease granted under this Rule shall be the date on which the lease deed is executed. (ii) The lease shall expire on the date specified in the lease deed and in no case extension of the period of lease shall be made." 9. As far as the present case is concerned, the First Respondent in the Gazette Notification dated 31.08.2006 has clearly specified that the period of lease will be only for 5 years in the tender-cum -auction notice. Inasmuch as all the quarrying including the quarry mentioned in Item Nos.1, 2 & 7 in the notification published in the Kancheepuram District Gazette Notification dated 30.10.2005 have already been exposed for quarrying operation at different points of time, then, by no stretch of imagination, the land in S.No.107 (Part) is situated at Siruthamur Village, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram District cannot be characterised as virgin quarry. When once it is clear that the quarry in issue is not a virgin one and as per Rule 8(8) of The Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959, the period of lease of quarrying stones which are virgin shall be 10 years and in respect of other areas shall be 5 years. Thus, it is quite evident that the period of lease in the tender notification in issue dated 31.08.2006 is only for 5 years and with eyes wide open, the Petitioner has taken part in the auction and finally, he has come out as a successful bidder. As such, the Petitioner, in law, is estopped by his own conduct from taking a contra plea that the lease period for quarrying stone should be 10 years. Viewed in that perspective, the Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same fails. 10. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. There shall be no order as to costs.