MANIR AHMAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties. The Divisional Forest Officer is also present in person. He has submitted his explanation to the notice issued to him under the proceedings dated 14.5.2002 that why he be not punished under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act.

(2.) THE facts necessary for disposal of the issue are that on an earlier occasion the petitioner had come to this Court submitting that the Circular, dated 10.7.2001 was quashed by this Court despite that the Respondent -D.F.O. misinterpreting the Circular and observing that present was a case of inter -State transportation of sawn Shisam wood directed initiation of the proceedings for confiscation of the truck and the Shisam wood/timber. It is worth noting that after the orders of the High Court in earlier matters, the Circular, dated 10.7.2001 was withdrawn by the State Government. The order impugned is Annexure -12. On 7.2.2002 the Divisional Forest Officer recorded that present was a case of inter -State removal/transit/transportation of timber and as the vehicle was not having the proper permit for transportation of the timber, the same amounted to a forest offence. This Court found in the order dated 7.2.2002 (Annexure -12) that the D.F.O. himself had recorded that:

(3.) THIS Court quashed the said order long months back observing that in absence of the Rules governing and controlling the inter -State transportation of the Sawn Shisam wood the State authority/Forest authorities had no jurisdiction or authority under the law to issue such a circular. Once the order was passed by this Court and it was known to everybody specially to the present officer because in accordance with the orders passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 16218 of 2001 he has passed the present order. If the officer knew about the earlier judgment in the matter of the present petitioner then there was no scope for him to hold that the truck was booked for destination in the State itself and not for Rajasthan.