BISHWA NATH MAJHI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 7.8.2001 passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, whereby the said authority has ordered to confiscate the Truck No. WB 55-2033 under the purported exercise of power under Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing the order dated 3.6.2003 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella-Kharsawan in Confiscation Appeal No. 3/2001-02, whereby the learned Deputy Commissioner has affirmed and upheld the order of the Divisional Forest Officer and dismissed the petitioner's appeal. The said orders have been challenged on several grounds. However, in course of hearing, much emphasis has been laid on the infirmity of order of the appellate authority dated 3.6.2003. It has been submitted that the said order is laconic, cryptic and non-speaking in as much as the same has been passed without any application of mind. The order has been passed without considering the grounds of appeal (Annexure-8) and mechanical order has been passed upholding the order of the Divisional Forest Officer on the alleged ground of admission of the petitioner in Ground-H of the memorandum of appeal.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that from memo of appeal (Annexure-8) it would be evident that there is no admission of the petitioner in ground-H about carrying 118 pieces of Sal wood having size 5X2 1/2 X8.

(3.) It has been submitted that the appellate authority, exercising the statutory appellate power, cannot deal with the appeal in a mechanical manner. The appellate authority has duty to discuss the ground, facts and materials on record and submission of the party and then come to its conclusion after due consideration thereof.