HEARD 1. In this writ petition a prayer has been made that respondents may be directed to release truck bearing registration No. HP-24-2388 and 97 numbers of TD scants of Deodar. This entire case property according to petitioners belongs to petitioner No. 4, who is Power of Attorney holder of the owners. They have further prayed that a direction to respondents to pay compensation of Rs. 7 lacks as damages for illegal seizure of their property and /or any other relief be issued/granted. Remotely 3 prayer has been made for quahing FIR No. 10 of 2000 under Section 379 of the I.P.C. registered at Police Station, Gohar. 2. At the time of hearing of this writ petition, it was pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioners that truck alongwith timber has been illegally seized by respondent No.4 and as a consequence of it, the aforesaid FIR has been registered. It was further pointed out by Mr. Paul that the timber in question belongs to petitioner No. 4 who is the Attorney of the owners and thus neither the provisions of Sections 41/42 of the Indian Forest Act nor any rules framed there-under much less those of Section 379 IPC are attracted to the facts of this case. On this ground he prayed for release of the timber as well as the truck and at the same time for quashing of the FIR. 3. Another fact which was brought to our notice at the time of hearing of this writ petition is that an application has been filed by petitioner No. 1 for the release of truck, which is admittedly pending before Divisional Forest Officer, at Karsog as per provisions of The Indian Forest (Himachal Pradesh Second Amendment) Act, 1991. It was further not disputed that after the seizure of timber as well as I truck, a prayer can be made to the Authorised Officer in terms of this U amendment for the release of the truck as well as timber as in then present case. This application was filed on 1.3.2002. Since then the matter is hanging fire according to Mr. Paul. All these plead were controverted by the learned Advocate General, who prayed for the dismissal of this writ. Learned Advocate General on instructions received from Mr. This application was filed on 1.3.2002. Since then the matter is hanging fire according to Mr. Paul. All these plead were controverted by the learned Advocate General, who prayed for the dismissal of this writ. Learned Advocate General on instructions received from Mr. K.R. Premi, Range Officer Pangna, District Mandi has stated that delay in disposal of the application is because of non cooperation on the part of the petitioners. 4. Be that as it may, and without going into the submissions urged at the time of hearing of this writ petition needs to be disposed of at this stage with the following directions; A) That parties shall appear before the Authorised Officer (DFO, Karsog in this case) with whom according to learned counsel for the petitioners application for release of truck as well as timber is pending, on 22.6.200; B) In case either of the parties fail to appear, the Authorised Officer on this date or on any other subsequent date, shall he free to deal with the matter in accordance with law in the absence of such Absenting party; C) Authorised Officer is directed to deal with this matter with utmost expedition and dispatch and ensure that he passes the final order in this case on or before 10.8.2002; 5. Copy dasti to the parties, Registry is further directed to send a copy of this order to the Authorised Officer (DFO, Karsog) for his record as well as for proceedings in the matter in accordance with law. We may further observe that we have not gone to the merits of the claims and contentions those were urged at the time of hearing of the matter, which has been disposed of in the aforesaid term.-