KHANDUJA BROTHERS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, an order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, directing the confication of 2000 bags of the charcoal is called in question. The said order was confirmed by the appellate authority, i. e. , the Resident Deputy Collector as also the revisional authority, i. e. , the Additional Commissioner.

(2.) A Talathi of Balajinagar found that there was a coal kiln being operated in the field of one Timaji Jagtap, being survey No.23 of village Yelabara. This was on 14-9-1989. He did not waste any time and proceeded to stop that kiln. He also executed a panchanama and gave the kiln and the charcoal that was being prepared in the same, in custody of one Rudrashankar Mataprasad Shrivastava who was allegedly a representative of one Khanduja Brothers of Nagpur, the present petitioner. He found that there was no valid permission with the said Rudrashankar Mataprasad Shrivasta in holding that kiln, muchless in the field belonging to the said Timaji. Curiously enough, the said field's owner has nowhere figured in the further proceedings and is not even a party here. On the report having been made to the Naib Tahsildar by the said Talaati, the Naib Tahsildar immediately sprang into action and served the notices. He recorded the statement of the said Rudrashankar Mataprasad Shrivastava. In that statement, there was a clearcut admission by the said Rudrashankar that there was no permission obtained for running a charcoal kiln. He admitted that he was the representative of the petitioner, namely, M/s Khanduja Brothers, and that the said kiln was constructed and being run on behalf of his employer. He also accepted that about 2000 gunny-bags of charcoal were prepared, out of which a quantity of about 1000 bags of charcoal was taken out. He claimed that the timber for this charcoal was purchased in the Forest Department auctions at Ner and/or Ghatanji, and that the said timber was transported by a truck to Balaji Nagar where the kiln was run. It seems that the said Rudrashankar Shrivastava filed before the Naib Tahsildar documents like receipts passed by Timaji for Rs. 200/- as the charges to allow his land for preparation of coal, the sketch-map, the 7/12 extract of the concerned field as also the permission granted by the Assistant Conservator of Forests dated 17-3-1989 to lift up the timber purchased in the auctions. The last document filed was a No Objection Certificate by the Gram Panchayat Yelabara for running a coal kiln. On this basis a report came to be made by the Naib Tahsildar, Yavatmal, to the Sub Divisional Officer. In that report, it was pointed out that the kiln was built and run without the necessary permission of the Revenue Department and, thus agricultural land was used unauthorisedly for the non-agricultural purposes. For this non-agricultural use of the agricultural land, a penalty and fine was proposed to be inflicted against the said Rudrashankar Mataprasad Shrivastava. This was done by report dated 13-10-1989. It seems that this report was submitted to the Tahsildar who, by his endorsement dated 17-10-1989, agreed with the proposals and probably put the same before the Sub Divisional Officer who passed a cryptic order of inflicting fine of Rs. 3240/ -. The Sub Divisional Officer did not stop here, but proceed to confiscate 80000 Kgms of charcoal, which was attached on 14-9-1989 by the Talhati. It was also directed that the said coal should be auctioned and the proceeds thereof should be deposited with the Government. Now. it is also seen from the record that this action was informed by the Naib Tahsildar, Yavatmal, to the Range Forest Officer, Jodmaha, by his communication dated 24-10-1989, and he was informed that he should not issue any transit passes in respect of 80000 Kgms of charcoal. The Revenue Inspector of Yelabara was instructed to recover the fine, while the petitioner was informed of the action taken by the Sub Divisional Officer.

(3.) SHRI R. R. Deshpande, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the State, however, pointed out that there is an ample power in the Revenue Officers to take any preventive action under section 66 of the Indian Forest Act. He further pointed out that the Talhati had taken such a preventive action by attaching the coal-kiln and it is this very action which is ultimately finalised by the Sub Divisional Officer to prevent any commission of the forest offence. Even otherwise, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that it was apparent that the preparation of the charcoal was wholly without any valid permission. SHRI Deshpande further submitted that when the permission was granted for preparation of the charcoal, the Range Forest Officer had specifically put a condition that the necessary rules should be followed and the permission by the Revenue Department to use the agricultural land for this purpose was one such condition. According to the learned Assistant Government Pleader, admittedly no such permission was given and, therefore, the petitioner was wholly unjustified in preparing the charcoal and such preparation would amount to a forest offence and in that view the Revenue Officers were justified in ordering the confiscation of the charcoal. SHRI Deshpande further pointed out that the petition was on behalf of Rudrashankar Mataprasad SHRIvastava whose relation with M/s Khanduja Brothers is not established at all and, therefore, the whole petition was liable to be dismissed.