SHREE NARAYAN YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for issuance of an appropriate writ under Sec. 226 of the Constitution of India in the nature of mandamus for release of truck confiscated in confiscation case no. 47/ 2005 as well as for directing the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to compromise the case no. 12(C)7/05 instituted under Sections 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria as also the confiscation case.

(2.) THE facts of the case are as follows; On 21.11.2005 at about 4 A.M. the informant, Ranger -cum -Forester, Khagaria alongwith subordinates was on patrolling duty. In course of it, he seized a truck alongwith forest woods bearing truck no. W.B. -03/9493. The truck belonged to the petitioner Shree Narayan Yadav. Accordingly, the aforesaid complaint case was filed against the petitioner by the Respondent No. 3 under the Forest Act and the confiscation proceeding under Sec. 52 (3) of Bihar Amendment Act (1990) being confiscation case no.12(C)7/05 was also initiated before the Divisional Forest Officer, Begusarai. The Divisional Forest Officer by his order dated 6.9.2006 (Annexure -2) confiscated the forest woods alongwith truck. The admitted fact is that the applicant did not prefer either appeal or revision against the order of confiscation. He has directly approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus for release of the truck and further direction to the respondents to compromise the case.

(3.) IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that exhausting alternative remedy before invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is not always required. It does not oust the jurisdiction of the court. Where the order in question is apparently illegal and contrary to law, the Court cannot refuse to grant appropriate relief on the ground of non -exhausting of alternative remedy provided under the Act. For that he has relied upon two decisions of the Apex Court reported In (1985)3 SCC 267 (Ram and Shyam Company vs. State of Haryana and Others) and 1979(4) SCC 22 (Asst. Collector of Central Excise vs. Jalnson Hosiery Industries).