Public interest and pending quarrying proceedings led the Court to decline interference with the High Court judgment.

Subsequent suspension orders, show-cause notices, later inspection reports and pending connected writ proceedings were treated as relevant in assessing whether interference with the High Court's judgment was warranted. Given the allegations of large-scale illegal quarrying and the wider public interest involved, the Court found it inappropriate to examine the rival merits at that stage. The Supreme Court therefore declined to interfere with the High Court judgment and dismissed the special leave petitions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Court should interfere with the impugned High Court judgment in view of the subsequent suspension orders, show-cause notices, pending writ proceedings, and allegations of large-scale illegal quarrying.

Analysis: The impugned order was examined against the later inspection reports and the administrative action taken under the mining law regime. The Court treated the subsequent events as relevant because the matter involved larger public interest and serious allegations affecting quarrying operations. In that background, and noting that connected proceedings were already pending before the High Court, the Court found it inappropriate to enter upon the merits of the rival contentions at that stage.

Conclusion: The Court declined to interfere with the High Court's judgment and dismissed the special leave petitions.

---