Kerala High Court
N.Sivaprasad vs The Chief Conservator Of Forest on 28 December, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL 2014/9TH VAISAKHA, 1936
WP(C).No. 11641 of 2014 (E)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
N.SIVAPRASAD
S/O. NEELAKANDA SHASTRY, KOTHAKUZHI VADAKKETHIL
VADAKKUMBAGAM P.O., CHAVARA SOUTH, KARUNAGAPALLY
KOLLAM, PROPRIETOR, MOHAN SAW MILL
VADAKKUMBAGAM P.O., KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL JACOB JOSE
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
SOUTHERN CIRCLE, KOLLAM.
2. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,
DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICE, KONNI - 689 691
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-04-
2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 11641 of 2014 (E)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 28/12/2011 ISSUED BY THE
DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, PUNALUR.
EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13/06/2013 OF THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20/06/2013 OF THE PETITIONER
FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11/09/2013 IN W.P(C)22339/2013.
EXHIBIT-P5-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. KNC 6.5486/2012 DATED 24/10/2013 OF
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBITY-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. KNC. 6-5476/2012 DATED 30/12/2013 OF
THE 2ND3 RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P7-TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 10/03/2014.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
---------------------------------------
NIL.
sdk+
///True copy///
P.S. to Judge
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No. 11641 of 2014
==================
Dated this the 29th day of April, 2014
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition with the following prayers:
"(i) call for the records leading to Ext.P7 and quash Ext.P6.
(ii) To declare that the petitioner is eligible for the protection under Rule 9 of the Kerala Forest (Regulation of Saw Mills & Other Wood Based Industrial (Units) Rules 2012;
(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order of direction to the 2nd respondent restraining from enforcing Ext.P6, as against the petitioner.
(iv) direct the 1swt respondent to pass orders on Ext.P7 appeal."
2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of a saw-mill, which is operated in Kollam District. The said saw-mill is said to be a small scale industry (SSI) registered unit and is said to be in operation since the year 1987 with valid licence granted by the Grama Panchayat concerned and certified by the jurisdictional Divisional Forest Officer, Punalur Division. It is pointed out by the petitioner that the licence granted by the Grama Panchayat was valid till 31.3.2014. This Court in the judgment dated 11.9.2013 in W.P.(C).No.22339/2013 (Ext.P4 herein) had directed the Divisional Forest Officer concerned (2nd w.p.c.11641/14 - : 2 :-
respondent herein) to consider the application for NOC after hearing the petitioner and also with reference to the documents produced by the petitioner etc. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent-Divisional Forest Officer passed Exts.P5 and P6 orders, which is said to be adverse to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner has filed Ext.P7 statutory appeal before the 1st respondent-Chief Conservator of Forest, Kollam. It is pointed out that the 2nd respondent has, in the meanwhile, taken steps for implementation of the directions contained in Ext.P6 to dismantle the band saw and auxiliary machines, which the petitioner claims will cause irreparable loss and injury to the writ petitioner. It is in the light of these facts and circumstances, the petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition challenging Ext.P6 with other connected prayers as quoted above.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Sunil Jacob Jose and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition itself without going into the merits of the issues raised in this Writ Petition. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent-Chief Conservator w.p.c.11641/14 - : 3 :-
of Forest, to take up for consideration Ext.P7 statutory appeal and afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. The petitioner is also at liberty to produce any additional materials as he deems fit and proper. After hearing the petitioner and due consideration of the relevant aspects of the matter, the 1st respondent-Chief Conservator of Forest shall pass final orders on Ext.P7 statutory appeal filed under the provisions of the Kerala Forest (Regulation of Saw Mills & Other Wood Based Industrial Units) Rules 2012, without any further delay. In order to safeguard the interest of the petitioner and in consideration of the balance of convenience, it is further ordered that till final orders are passed by the 1st respondent on Ext.P7, the petitioner shall operate the unit with the machineries as per Ext.P5 and further coercive steps in terms of Ext.P6 shall also be kept in abeyance.
Sd/-
sdk+ ALEXANDER THOMAS , JUDGE
///True copy///
P.S. to Judge
w.p.c.11641/14 - : 4 :-