JUDGMENT Per Deepak Gupta, J 1. By means of these review petitions, the petitioners have prayed that the order dated 15th June, 2012 passed by this Court in CWPIL No. 9 of 2011 be modified insofar as those lessees are concerned who had initially applied for grant of mining lease for an area of less than 5 hectares. In the earlier order the issue involved in the petition was whether a person who had applied for grant of mining lease for areas exceeding 5 hectares but had later reduced the area to less than 5 hectares was required to obtain environmental clearance or not. 2. This Court had passed a detailed order and we find no reason to review or recall any portion of the order insofar as those persons are concerned who had initially applied for grant of mining lease of an area measuring more than 5 hectares but later reduced the area to less than 5 hectares. This is because for an area exceeding 5 hectares environmental clearance would be required under the EIA Notification, 2006, and it is apparent that these petitioners reduced the area of the land to less than 5 hectares only with a view to circumvent the notification. Relying upon the order of the Apex Court in Special Leave Petition Nos. 19628/2009 and 19629/2009, titled Deepak Kumar etc. v. State of Haryana and others etc. we had given the following directions:- “4. While taking the period of one year the State shall act as follows: 1. In cases where the lease was granted after 27.2.2011, one year shall be reckoned from the date of grant of lease deed regardless of the fact whether the lease was granted for one year or for more years. 2. There may be cases where the leases were granted prior to 27.2.2011 and were granted for a period of more than one year in such an eventuality period of one year shall be reckoned from the date of the lease deed falling between 27.2.2011 and 27.2.2012. To explain this we may give an example. Supposing a lease deed was granted on 15.9.2009 for a period of five years then this period of one year shall commence from 15.9.2011. 5. To explain this we may give an example. Supposing a lease deed was granted on 15.9.2009 for a period of five years then this period of one year shall commence from 15.9.2011. 5. In view of the above discussion, we direct that in all leases which were executed prior to 27.2.2012 the lessees shall be permitted to operate the mining lease for a period of one year from the date of the lease deed as explained above and it will be required to obtain Environmental clearance before the lease renewal. In those cases where the mining lease were executed after 27.2.2012 the mining operation should be stopped forthwith and will be permitted to continue only in case environmental clearance is granted. We may make it also clear that lessees may apply for grant of environmental clearance and if such application is moved, the same should be deposited within 15 days from the receipt of complete application.” 3. It has been urged before us that as far as those persons who had initially applied for area of less than 5 hectares are concerned, there was no requirement that they should seek environmental clearance. The State had placed before us material to show that where the mining lease is for an area less than 5 hectares granted prior to 27.2.2012 when the order was passed by the Apex Court, mining activities were being allowed to continue till the currency of period of mining. It was in this light, we had passed the aforesaid directions. 4. Now it has been urged before us that it is impossible to obtain environmental clearance in a period of less than 18 months because of the various formalities involved and it has been prayed that the lessee may be permitted to continue with the mining activities till the period of completion of mining lease and only if the mining lease has to be renewed then the environmental clearance should be asked for. 5. Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions and the legal provisions which clearly show that about 11½ years are required to obtain environmental clearance we feel that the request of the review petitioners is justified to a certain extent. 5. Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions and the legal provisions which clearly show that about 11½ years are required to obtain environmental clearance we feel that the request of the review petitioners is justified to a certain extent. We, therefore, clarify that our earlier directions dated 15th June, 2012 shall apply only in respect of those lease holders who had originally applied for mining lease of more than 5 hectares but had later reduced it to less than 5 hectares. In case of those lease holders who had applied for mining lease at the initial stage for the area less than 5 hectares, the mining activities shall be permitted to continue till the expiry of the mining lease or till 31st August, 2013 whichever is earlier. This gives a period of 1½ years to the lessees to obtain the environmental clearance. We also make it clear that as and when such a lessee applies for environmental clearance his case(s) shall be considered on priority basis and it shall be disposed of in accordance with law before 31st August, 2013. The review petitions are allowed to the aforesaid limited extent. We may again clarify that as far as those lessees who had applied for grant of mining lease for areas exceeding 5 hectares but had later reduced it to less than 5 hectares are concerned, the previous order shall continue to apply with full force and vigour.