JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Ms. Rashika Singh, AC to Mrs. Richa Sanchita, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 16.09.2014 passed in W.P. (C) No. 8049 of 2012 by which the writ application preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed. 3. The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that though he was granted license and was also having consent to operate by the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board for running a brick kiln but by virtue of the Notification issued by the Central Government dated 29.03.2012 the petitioner was directed to close down the brick kiln. This was under challenge in W.P. (C) No. 8049 of 2012 which was dismissed and which led the appellant to prefer the present appeal. 4. It appears from perusal of the impugned order dated 16.09.2014 that the Central Government had notified an area of 5 k.m. from the boundary of the protected area of Dalma Wild Life Sanctuary as Eco-sensitive Zone and accordingly 522.98 sq. k.m. in the district of East Singhbhum and Seraikella Kharsawan has been notified and declared as an Eco-sensitive Zone. The petitioner has challenged the power of the Central Government in declaring the said area as an Eco-sensitive Zone and is aggrieved by the fact that he has been refused permission to operate his brick kiln. It is an admitted fact that the brick kiln of the petitioner is a commercial mining activity and in view of the notification dated 29.03.2012 it falls under the prohibited category and therefore the learned Single Judge had rightly come to a conclusion that the writ petitioner does not have of a case which could be interfered with. 5. In view of the above, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 16.09.2014, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) No. 8049 of 2012 and consequently, this appeal stands dismissed.