ORDER 11.2.2005 Heard. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner to seek a direction against the opposite party No.1 i.e., The Divi¬sional Forest Officer, Dhenkanal to grant timber transit permit on the basis of the Annexure-3 filed by the applicant said to be in the year 1998. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that as per the Order Annexure-4, communicated to the Tahasildar, Kamakshyanagar, vide Memo No.961 dated 9.2.1999 the opposite party No.1 (The Divisional Forest Officer, Dhenkanal) directed for a joint verification and thereafter, the matter is not being processed any further by the said opposite party. 2. Annexure-3 is said to be a Xerox copy of the applica¬tion in Form-III vide Rule 7 (a). On perusal of Annexure-3, we find that clause (e) of the Form has not been filled by providing necessary particulars inasmuch as according to that column a list in triplicate specifying the number species, size of timber and/or quantity of fire wood or bamboo/and/or quantity of other forest produce proposed to be removed was to be mentioned. As against that column, applicant has endorsed that such particulars would be furnished after the joint verification. When the re¬quirement of law is that such particulars is to be furnished in the application, therefore, it is not understood how the Divi¬sional Forest Officer, Dhenkanal passed order and communicated instruction under Annexure-4 for a joint verification. That application being incomplete, either the applicant should have been called upon to furnish the required particulars or that application should have been rejected in limine. 3. While dealing with such disputes, we have seen that notwithstanding such defective applications in some cases the Divisional Forest Officers have passed order for joint verifica¬tion instead of following either of the aforesaid courses. Learned counsel for the State is unable to provide any justifia¬ble reason for such illegal orders of the concerned Forest Offi¬cials and authorities. 4. We find the matter to be serious and desire that the matter be brought to the notice of the State Government and we hope and trust that at the level of Secretary to the Government in Forest and Revenue Department appropriate remedial measures would be taken to not to allow such incomplete applications besides making periodical verification of such cases of Timber Transit Permit and to punish erring officers, if any. 5. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner desires to make a fresh application in proper manner applying for the timber transit permit and the opposite party Nos.1 and 2 be directed to attend to the same expeditiously. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to that submission and states that if proper application is filed, the opposite party members shall process the same by avoiding undue delay. 6. Regard being had to the aforesaid facts and circum¬stances and the submissions of learned counsel, we dispose of this writ petition without issuing any direction for appropriate order on Annexure-3 but with the observation that if the peti¬tioner files a fresh application for timber transit permit that may be considered by the concerned authorities strictly in accor¬dance with law but by avoiding unreasonable delay. A copy each of this order be send to the Chief Secretary and the Secretaries in Forest and Revenue departments of the State for due implementation of the aforesaid direction and observa¬tion. Petition disposed of.