ORDER : Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4. 4. According to the petitioner, she is the owner of the property in Sy. No. 471/1A admeasuring 2.43 hectares, since the said property comprised of small hillocks. Inasmuch as the property is her patta land, she has proposed to have quarrying operation in the said property. In order to carry out the quarrying operation, she made an application before the authorities concerned and submitted an application in proper format in the year 2001. The authorities concerned, after considering her application and also on being satisfied with the legal formalities granted licence to her for carrying out quarry operation in the year 2001 and pursuant to the same, the petitioner is carrying on the quarrying operations. 5. The stand of the petitioner is that the original lease had expired and thereafter, she had applied for an extension, which was granted on 09.01.2008 for a period of 5 years, which comes to an end during the year 2013. Subsequently, she made an application for renewal, which is kept pending. In the mean while, in order to augment the business, she has proposed to have a Crusher Unit. As such, she made an application in this regard and after considering the application, she was granted permission to have a crusher Unit. As such, she is eking out her livelihood from the income which is derived out of quarrying operation as well as that of crusher operation. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner proceeds to state that the petitioner's application for further lease period was approved by the concerned authority and now, the same is pending before the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority. After inspecting the quarrying spot and after calling the petitioner for an interview, the authorities had informed that she would be issued with licence for quarrying business etc.. 6. It comes to be known that during year 2013, the Village Administrative Officer had issued a certificate saying that there is no residential area within the radius of 300 metres of quarrying site and the petitioner had obtained yet another certificate recently from the Village Administrative Officer, who after spot verification was pleased to issue certificate stating that there is no residential area within the radius of 300 metres. At this stage, the grievance of the petitioner is that still the respondents are endeavouring to allot house pattas to prevent the petitioner's business activities in collusion with the President of Panchayat. As such, she made a representation on 30.06.2016 to the respondents and in spite of receipt of the same, till date, there is no response from the first respondent. 7. Considering the fact that the petitioner's representation dated 30.06.2016 is pending before the first respondent/District Collector, Tirunevlei District, Kokkirakulam, Tirunelveli District, at this stage, this Court, without expressing any opinion one way or other on the merits and contents of the representation of the petitioner and also not delving deep into the subject matter in issue, simpliciter, directs the first respondent/District Collector, Tirunelveli District to immediately look into the representation of the petitioner dated 30.06.2016 with all seriousness and earnestness within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Thereafter, the first respondent is directed to pass a reasoned, speaking order on merits (by outlining the process of reasoning in a quantitative and qualitative fashion, of-course by following the principles of Natural Justice in true letter and spirit), within a period of three weeks thereafter. It is needless for this Court to make a significant mention that the first respondent/District Collector, Tirunelveli, is to pass a speaking order in the subject matter in issue in a free, fair, unbiased and dispassionate manner within the time determined by this Court. The petitioner is directed to lend her assistance and co-operation to the first respondent/District Collector, Tirunelveli, in disposing of her representation dated 30.06.2016, within the time stipulated by this Court. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.