RAM PYARA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, by this common judgment all these petitions are being disposed of together.

(2.) A very short point is involved for consideration in these cases. Show cause notices were issued against the petitioners by the Divisional Forest Officer, Bilaspur Forest Division, alleging therein that the petitioners had not exported the forest produce through the land route(s) mentioned in the permits as no entries of the petitioners' permits had been found in the registers maintained at the concerned check posts. The Divisional Forest Officer accordingly felt that the petitioners had pilferaged the forest produce some where by indulging in illegal trade. The operative part of the notices stated as under:

(3.) WHETHER it is condition No.16 (a) or Condition No. 16(b), it is stipulated that if the produce is not exported with a proper export permit etc. or if the produce has been stealthily exported, the contractor is liable to pay penalty at the rate of Rs.150/- per quintal plus road taxes etc. It is also mentioned in the aforesaid Clause 16(a) that the produce itself would be also liable to be confiscated, apart from recovering compensation from the contractor which may amount to Rs.500/- for each lapse committed by the contractor.