it is clear that the plots in question are located in the urban area of Pachmarhi and thus, there is no question of these plots being covered either under the wildlife sanctuary or the ESZ area. He thus urged that the applicant deserves the relief sought for. 14. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents have opposed the submissions advanced by Mr. Naidu. Learned counsel for the State of Madhya Pradesh urged that the plots in question are subject matter of litigation in the writ appeal pending before the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court and 13thus, the applicant should await the outcome of the aforesaid writ appeal before seeking permission to construct the health/eco- resort on the land in question. 15. His further contention was that the plots in question are recorded in the name of the State of Madhya Pradesh and hence, the applicant cannot claim any right thereupon. 16. Mr. K. Parameshwar, learned Amicus Curiae appearing on behalf of the CEC