ORDER : In this batch of writ petitions, the issues involved are common and, as such, all are being heard and decided together. 2. For ready reference prayer of the writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 2360 of 2015 is being quoted as under: a) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including the writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the order, as contained in Letter no.157/Mining, Medini Nagar dated 27.3.2015 issued under the signature of the Deputy Commissioner, Palamu-Respondent No.3, whereby and whereunder, auction for settlement of Sand Ghat in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled in terms of Letter no.176/2012, Part-Vi 346/M dated 20.2.2015 issued under the signature of the Joint Secretary, Mines & Geology Department, Government of Jharkhand; b). For declaring that the condition of submission of documents mentioned in Letter of Intent no. 803 dated 01.11.2013 within 60 days is unreasonable and arbitrary and ultra vires the Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India as also the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 read with the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2007, or in the alternative, for declaring that such condition of 60 days as merely directory in nature; c) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, Including the writ in the nature of mandamus to Respondent no. 6 directing it to consider and decide the application of the Petitioner for grant of Environmental Clearances dated 23.07.2014 within a stipulated period of time, preferably within 30 days from the date of direction of this Hon'ble Court; d) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including the writ in the nature of mandamus to Respondents no. 1 to 5 directing them to immediately transfer 80% of the amount so far deposited by the Petitioner towards the bid amount to Respondent no. 7 under Rule 12(5) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2007 as amended by sec. 2 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2010; e) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, including the writ in the nature of mandamus to Respondent no. 6 directing it to grant recommendation, upon receiving the aforesaid 80% amount from Respondents no. 1 to 5, to the Petitioner Rule 12(3) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2007 as amended by sec. 6 directing it to grant recommendation, upon receiving the aforesaid 80% amount from Respondents no. 1 to 5, to the Petitioner Rule 12(3) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2007 as amended by sec. 2 of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession (Amendment) Rules, 2010; AND f) For any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is legally entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Mr. Indrajit Sinha, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in all cases at the outset has submitted that he is not pressing the grievance regarding issue of settlement of the Sand Ghat of different districts i.e. Palamau and Pakur, of the State of Jharkhand which has been cancelled by the order impugned but the Earnest Money and the Security Deposit which have been deposited as a pre-condition for participation in the process of bid of the aforesaid Sand Ghat is required to be refunded, since, according to him, no laches can be said to be committed on behalf of the petitioners and if there is laches on the part of the State Government in issuance of environment clearance certificate by the competent authority, i.e, SEIAA, then no attributability can be casted upon the petitioners on that ground. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, therefore, has submitted that these writ petitions, so far as the cancellation of the Sand Ghat is concerned, are not pressing, however, he has sought for liberty to raise the issue for refund of the Earnest Money and the Security Deposit by filing appropriate applications, individually, before the Secretary of the concerned department, i.e., Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand by raising all available points. 5. Mrs. Darshana Poddar Mishra, the learned State counsel has not disputed such liberty having been sought for on behalf of the petitioners, rather she has fair enough to submit that if such representation will be filed raising the aforesaid grievance, the competent authority will consider the same and take a decision in accordance with law. 6. 5. Mrs. Darshana Poddar Mishra, the learned State counsel has not disputed such liberty having been sought for on behalf of the petitioners, rather she has fair enough to submit that if such representation will be filed raising the aforesaid grievance, the competent authority will consider the same and take a decision in accordance with law. 6. This Court, considering the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the parties and having expressed the consent on behalf of the petitioners to not press the writ petitions so far as the issue of tender regarding the settlement of Sand Ghat is concerned, however, liberty which has been sought for by raising the issue for refund of amount of the Earnest Money and the Security Deposit is required to be given to the petitioners for its determination. 7. Accordingly, these writ petitions are being disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners to make individual representation to the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand with all details supported by relevant documents and if such representation will be filed, then the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand will take a decision and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid direction, these writ petitions are disposed of. 9. I.A., if any, stands disposed of.