FOREST RANGE OFFICER Vs. P AMANTHIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) writ appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant on the short ground that the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khammam made in Cri. Appeal No. 46/84 is not amenable to writ jurisdiction but that the appellant could have preferred a criminal revision to the High Court. The learned Judge also permitted the appellant to convert the writ petition into a revision. Against this order the present writ appeal has been preferred.

(2.) In this writ appeal, it is contended by the learned Government Pleader that the appeal preferred to the Addl. Sessions Judge was an appeal under S. 44(2F) of the A.P. Forest Act. That section reads as follows:

(3.) In the present case the appeal to the 1st Addl. District Judge, Khammam under S. 44(2)(E) was preferred by the respondent for setting aside an order dated 16-8-84 made by the Divisional Forest Officer (South Division) Bhadrachelam. Under the said order dated 16-8-84 the said officer ordered confiscation of the timber together with lorry, tarpolin etc. on the ground that they had been used in committing the forest offence. It is not in dispute before us that the order passed by the Divisional Forest Officer is an order passed under sub-sec. 2A of S. 44.