MOIDEENKUTTY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the writ petitioner, whoso prayer for getting the order of September 17, 1957, by the Collector of Kozhikode, vacated has not been allowed. The circumstances. Under which the aforesaid petition has been filed in this court, can be shortly stated.

(2.) The appellant had, on May 10, 1957, obtained an agreement whereby he has been given a right to cut and remove 150 trees from the unsurveyed parts of the Kovilakam forests in Kanhirapuzha and Vadakkummuri Malavaram in Nilambur Amsom, Ernad Taluk. The lease (had?) been executed after a sanction under Section 3(1)(a) of the Madras Preservation of Private Forests Act, 1949, hereinafter referred to as the Act, and the appellant on May 12, 1957, requested the Collector of Kozhikode District, who has been impleaded as the second respondent to the writ petition, for permission to cut and remove 150 trees under Section 3(2) of the Act. The Collector forwarded the application to the proper authorities for report and the Special Forest Range Officer reported against the permission being granted. The complaint in the writ petition is about the report being without the appellant's being asked to accompany the officer when he inspected and even the report to he without any visit to the area. On June 7, 1957, the Collector rejected the application, and the rejection order is marked as Ext. P-1. The relevant extract from the order runs as follows:

(3.) The Collector has throughout acted not as the authority deciding on requests, but has accepted merely the recommendations of the forest officer, which results in the decisions not being of the Collector.