JUDGMENT : A. Muhamed Mustaque, Acg.C.J. This appeal is filed at the instance of the fifth respondent in the writ petition. The appellant/fifth respondent is the holder of the Environment Clearance for the purpose of a Granite Building Stone Quarry in Thalappally Taluk, Thrissur District. 2. The writ petition was filed challenging the Environmental Clearance as early as on 22.02.2024. Thereafter, a representation which is marked as Ext.P14 in the writ petition was filed before the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority. This representation was submitted, pending writ petition, on 12.05.2024. Thereafter, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition directing the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority to consider the representation. This is questioned before this Court in this writ appeal by the fifth respondent. 3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant/fifth respondent submits that no Writ of Mandamus would lie in the matter where representation itself was submitted subsequent to the writ petition. It is submitted that the remedy of any aggrieved person to challenge the Environmental Clearance lies before the National Green Tribunal invoking Section 16(h) of the National Green Tribunal Act. It is further submitted that under Clause 8(v) of EIA Notification 2006, on a limited ground alone, the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority can revisit the issuance of Environmental Clearance. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the 7th respondent/writ petitioner would submit that there were material suppression of facts. The cluster certificate produced by the project proponent i.e., the appellant herein, disclosed that there are other quarries lying in the near vicinity and the factual aspects need to be addressed by the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority and therefore, this representation would come within Clause 8(vi) of the EIA Notification, 2006. 5. We find that there is no scope for issuing a Writ of Mandamus in a matter like this when the Environmental Clearance has been issued. If there exists any grievance, the aggrieved can very well move to the National Green Tribunal invoking alternative remedy. The Environmental Clearance was issued based on the cluster certificate. There is no concealment alleged against the project proponent i.e. the appellant herein. In such situation, the representation as such cannot be considered by the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority. If there exists any grievance, the aggrieved can very well move to the National Green Tribunal invoking alternative remedy. The Environmental Clearance was issued based on the cluster certificate. There is no concealment alleged against the project proponent i.e. the appellant herein. In such situation, the representation as such cannot be considered by the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority. We, therefore, of the view that in a case where the Writ of Mandamus would not lie, the impugned judgment can be set aside and we do so. However, we give liberty to the 7th respondent/ writ petitioner to approach the National Green Tribunal. The 7th respondent/writ petitioner is permitted to canvass the period involved in this litigation for exclusion from the period of limitation before the National Green Tribunal. This writ appeal stands allowed as above.