ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties . 3. The Division Bench of the High Court of Uttarakhand by the impugned order dated 27th November, 2018 has restored the writ petition to the file of the learned single judge for consideration/examination of the issue with regard to validity of notifications dated 7th August, 2015, 26th February, 2016 and 19th May, 2016 whereby rates of royalty had been revised from time to time. 4. The appellant is aggrieved by the fact that the second prayer of the appellant pertaining to the issue of stoppage of mining activity has not been directed to be considered/examined by the learned single judge. Hence this appeal. 5. We have perused the counter affidavit dated 20 th February, 2019 filed on behalf of the State of Uttarakhand wherein in paragraph 29 it has been stated as follows: "29. Without prejudice to the above, in the peculiar facts of the present case, this Hon'ble Court may consider that the petitioner's mining lease which is valid till 19.2.2021, may be extended by 5 months i.e. the period for which the stay was operative. In this way, the petitioner will be paying for the 5 missed installments against the mining activities undertaken by her during the said extended period." 6. In view of the above, and as the learned single judge of the High Court would be considering one aspect of the case in terms of the impugned order, we request the learned single judge of the High Court to look into the issue with regard to legality etc. of stoppage of mining activities by the appellant and pass a reasoned order in that regard. 7. With the aforesaid modification of the order of the Division Bench of the High Court the appeal is disposed of.