TAJENDRA PAL SINGH Vs. DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER GORAKHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer of the petitioner Virendra Singh was to quash the order dated 4-6-1993 passed by Respon dent No. 3 the Forest Ranger, Forest Range Laxmipur (Van Prabhag III), Maharajganj, as contained in Annexure-3 to this writ petition. His further prayer is to command the Respondents to relate the woods which have been taken away from his possession and not to interfere in his peaceful business.

(2.) A perusal of Annexure-3 shows that it is a seizure report submitted by respondent No. 3 to the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Unfortunately the Chief Judi cial Magistrate has not been impleaded as a party- respondent by the petitioner nor has it been stated as to what order he has passed in relation to the seizure report. Its further perusal shows that the Saw machine of Virendra Singh alias Balbeer Singh, Proprietor of 'singh Saw Mill' was enquired into in presence of (i) Forest Officer, North Gorakhpur, (ii) Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nautanwa, (iii) Forest Officer Laxmipur, (iv) Circle Of ficer Farenda, (v) Station House Officer, Puranderpur and other Police and Forest officials. During enquiry in the Saw Mill premises it was found that after bringing illegally round logs from the forest some of which were cut and seized along with tools used in the Saw machine and brought to the office premises by exercising the powers vested in the authority under Sec tions 26 and 52 of the Forest Act and Saw Mill Rules.

(3.) THE main thrust of the contention of Sri A. K. Shukla, learned counsel ap pearing in support of the prayers made in this writ petition, was that no term and condition of the licence granted under the Saw Mill Rules was breached by Virendra Singh aforementioned in whose Mill the logs were only cut. From where they had come was not required to be enquired. In any event the articles of Saw Mill could not be seized. Accordingly the seizure was il legally made and the petitioner is entitled to the reliefs claimed for in this writ peti tion.