MEHBUB ABDUL RAZAK DURVESH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of rule on behalf of respondent-State.

(2.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 19.02.2015 passed in Revision Application No. Udag/10/5/2526/ 14-15 by the respondent No.2-Chief Conservator of Forest, whereby the order dated 23.01.2015 in case No.K/Udag/11/2373-76/2014 passed by respondent No.1Deputy Conservator of Forest was confirmed. The case of the petitioner is pertaining to Pitha licence (Depot licence) for the purpose of wood processing which by the impugned order came be cancelled.

(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioner at the outset submits that though the petition is based on several grounds, but would like to urge the main and important ground that while taking the impugned decision, the respondent authorities have travelled beyond the scope of the show-cause notice issued to the petitioner. Learned advocate submits that the petitioner was issued the depot licence for the purpose of carrying out the business of wood processing was renewed from time to time and lastly was renewed till 31.12.2014, but before that a show-cause notice dated 21.01.2014 came to be issued to the petitioner on the ground mentioned in such show-cause notice that around the depot, there is no permanent constructed wall for a wire fencing nor there is a proper gate facility, which can lock the premises and hence, the petitioner was given 3 days to show cause as to why the licence issued to the petitioner should not be cancelled. The petitioner made his representation on 07.02.2014, partly admitting about non construction of the permanent wall, but was informed by the local Grampanchayat that as the railway over-bridge crossing the railway line is proposed, work got delayed.