( 1 ) HEARD Smt. Poonam Srivastava learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri Yogesh Agarwal 1 for respondent No. 3.

( 2 ) THE petitioner has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents to grant lease for Pheri khurd, block No. 1 in favour of respondent No. 3 on the basis of his application moved in 1995.

( 3 ) IT appears that an application of respondent No. 3 for grant of mining lease for 3 years from 1995 to 1998 was accepted by the authorities vide Annexure-2 to the petition but the lease deed was not executed because of an interim order of the Lucknow Bench of this Court dated 9. 2. 1996 vide Annexure-CA2 in Writ Petition No. 437 (MB) of 1996. This writ petition was subsequently withdrawn on 9. 10. 1998 vide Annexure-CA4. The respondent No. 3 deposited a sum of Rs. 6,11,062. 50 as first instalment of the lease amount vide Annexure-CA2. However, due to the interim order of the Lucknow Bench the lease deed could not be executed. Thereafter the respondent No. 3 moved an application to the Director who opined that the lease should be executed vide order 20. 11. 1998. Annexure-CA6. However, no lease was granted