ORDER IAs Nos. 1868,2091,2225-27,2380 and 2568 in WP (C) No.202 of 1995 1. Post on 11-9-2009 as part-heard. Parties would be at liberty to file and exchange affidavits in the meantime. IAs Nos. 1274-75,2423-25,2537-38 in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995 2. There were a large number of sawmills, veneer plants and plywood factories in the State of Bihar and in order to feed them there was large-scale cutting of trees. These sawmills and other wood-based industries were closed following this Court's orders. The CEC has filed a feasibility report regarding grant of licences for these units. The CEC has suggested that the State of Bihar should re-examine the availability of timber from all squrces, including the timber available from non-forest area, timber imported from other States ) and from other countries. Having thus determined the availability of timber, the State Government should work out, applying equitable and nondiscriminatory criteria, the total number of wood-based units in different categories, namely, sawmills, government sawmills, plywood units, veneer units, etc. which should be allowed to continue. 3. In that connection it was also directed that the State should prepare a seniority list of different categories of wood based units for the purpose of granting licences. It appears that there were some disputes regarding the basis of determination of seniority and the State has now filed an affidavit stating that the State would face problems if seniority is to be determined on the basis of date of application. We do not think that any criteria other than the one suggested by the CEC may be adopted by the State. The seniority list f may be prepared by the State as suggested by the CEC. IAs Nos. 2460-61 4. The applications relate to determination of seniority of the wood-based units in Bihar. These could be disposed of by the State on the lines suggested by the CEC, as indicated above, and in accordance with law. The State should prepare the seniority list of the wood-based units within a period of three months. IAs Nos. 2522-23 5. Learned counsel appearing for these applicants submitted that they are running only plywood pasting units which do not use or have any "peeler" or a "slicer" or a "horizontal/vertical band". These units are what is commonly known as "pasting units" and these are not the primary consumers of timber. IAs Nos. 2522-23 5. Learned counsel appearing for these applicants submitted that they are running only plywood pasting units which do not use or have any "peeler" or a "slicer" or a "horizontal/vertical band". These units are what is commonly known as "pasting units" and these are not the primary consumers of timber. These units also do not have the facilities for sawing, converting or shaping timber and they do not require a sawmill licence from the State authorities. The applicants submitted that their case may be considered separately from sawmills, veneer plants and plywood factories in the State of Bihar. 6. The CEC may examine the claim of the applicants and may also consider whether these units can be allowed to use "trimming machines" for cutting plywood for the purpose of pasting only. The CEC may submit its report expeditiously. IAs Nos. 2652-53 with IA No. 1349 in Nos. 1246-47, 1378-80, 1446-47, 1502 and 2299-300 in WP (C) No. 202 of 1995 7. Adjourned by three weeks. Court Masters