K.M. Joseph, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties on the applications for condonation of delay in filing the review petitions. In the circumstances, the delay will stand condoned and the applications will stand allowed.

2. MCC No. 856 of 2015 has been filed by a person, who was a party, namely, respondent no. 4. MCC No. 858 of 2015 has been filed by a person, who was not a party. MCC No. 5823 of 2016 has been filed by the State of Uttarakhand and another.

3. These three review petitions have been filed in the Writ Petition (PIL) No. 66 of 2014, whereas, MCC No. 660 of 2016 has been filed in Writ Petition (PIL) No. 41 of 2015.

4. The first petition, which was disposed of, was Writ Petition (PIL) No. 41 of 2015. Writ Petition (PIL) No. 66 of 2014 was disposed of following the judgment in Writ Petition (PIL) No. 41 of 2015.

5. The issue relates to the requirement of obtaining consent under the Wildlife (Protection) Act for doing mining activities in the vicinity of National Park, Sanctuary and Protected areas.

6. See the prayers in Writ Petition (PIL) No. 66 of 2014, which are on the same lines:-

“1. To direct the respondents to forthwith stop any mining activity being carried