SHAIK HUSSAIN Vs. D F O PRODDATUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this batch of cases, the vires of Rules 3(3), 5(2), 7(1) and (2) of the Andhra Pradesh Saw Mills (Regulation) Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') as amended by G.O.Ms. No. 99 and G.O.Ms. No. 100, Environment, Forest, Science and Technology (For.III) Department dated 17-7-1998 is in question.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the fact of the matter may be noticed from the first case i.e. Writ Petition No. 12290 of 1999.

(3.) The petitioner for the purpose of establishing a Saw-mill in Proddutur Town, Cuddapah district took on lease land to the extent of 579 sq. mts. in S. No. 595 from one Sri B. S. Ameer on 31-12-1997. Pursuant to the recommendation of the Director of Town and Country Planning, by reason of Memo dated 19-1-1999, State Government granted relaxation of the Master Plan Zoning Regulation as also relaxation of the change of the land use from residential to industrial in favour of the petitioner on certain conditions which were complied with by the petitioner. He had also obtained No Objection Certificate from the Mandal Revenue Officer and also requisite permission from the Factories Department for establishing the Saw-mill. Thereafter, he submitted an application to the 1st respondent for issuance of a licence under the relevant rules for establishing a Saw-mill in the name and style of "Everest Saw-Mill". On the application of the petitioner, the 1st Respondent called for remarks from the Forest Range Officer who recommended the case of the petitioner, however, with an endorsement that the Saw-mill sought to be established is situated within 5 kms. from the reserve forest as per the amended rules issued in G.O.Ms. No. 99 EFS and T Department dated 17-7-1998. Basing on the report of the Forest Range Officer, the 1st respondent by proceedings dated 21-11-1998 rejected the application of the petitioner on the ground that no fresh Saw-mill could be permitted to be established within the prohibited distance. The 2nd respondent on 24-5-1999 also rejected the appeal preferred thereagainst.