Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 360 (JHR)

Bishwa Nath Majhi v. State of Jharkhand

2012-03-13

N.N.TIWARI

body2012
JUDGMENT 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. 2. 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. 3. 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 ½X8. 4. 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. 5. Learned counsel submitted that on perusal of the order of the appellate authority dated 3.6.2003 (Annexure-7) it is evident that there was absolutely no application of mind by the appellate authority. He has not discussed the facts and materials on record and the several grounds taken by the petitioner. He has mechanically observed that there is no denial of fact that 118 pieces of Sal wood having size 5X2 ½X8 was loaded in the truck in question without valid forest/transfer permit and papers. The basis of the said finding of learned appellate court is alleged admission of the petitioner in Ground-H of the memorandum of appeal. But there is no such admission of the petitioner. The basis of the said finding of learned appellate court is alleged admission of the petitioner in Ground-H of the memorandum of appeal. But there is no such admission of the petitioner. The impugned appellate order is wholly arbitrary, non-speaking and is violative of principles of natural justice and the same is nullity in law. 6. Learned J.C. to Sr. S.C. II appearing on behalf of the State-respondents, after going through the record, has not disputed the said contention of learned counsel for the petitioner. However, he has submitted that since the appellate authority has not properly dealt with the appeal, the appellate order may be set aside and the matter be remitted to the said authority in stead of dealing with the same by this Court in writ jurisdiction. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order of learned appellate authority, I find that the appellate authority has disposed of the appeal in almost one sentence. The appellate authority himself has admitted in ground No.H of his Memo of Appeal that he was carrying the seized material. There is no denial of fact that 118 pieces of Sal wood having size 5X2 ½X8 was loaded in the truck in question without valid forest/transfer permit and papers. However, on going through the Memorandum of Appeal (Annexure-8), I find no such admission of the petitioner. I further find that the order is a cryptic and non-speaking. Learned appellate authority has not discussed the grounds and materials on record. 8. If an appeal is provided under the provisions of some statute, it confers a valuable right on the parties. A duty is caste on the appellate court/authority to thoroughly examine the facts and material on record and scrutinize the order appealed against in the light of the grounds taken by the appellant and to deal with the grounds and record its finding based on the facts and evidences on record. 9. From the impugned order I find that learned appellate authority has not discussed the facts, materials and evidences on record and has not considered the grounds taken in appeal. The ground on which the appeal has been disposed of, is non-existent. 10. The appellate court, without any application of mind, has summarily dismissed the petitioner's appeal and upheld the order of confiscation of the petitioner's vehicle in a most casual manner. The ground on which the appeal has been disposed of, is non-existent. 10. The appellate court, without any application of mind, has summarily dismissed the petitioner's appeal and upheld the order of confiscation of the petitioner's vehicle in a most casual manner. The impugned order of the appellate authority is non-speaking, cryptic and is violative of principles of natural justice. 11. For the reasons aforementioned, the order dated 3.6.2003 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella-Kharsawan (Annexure-7) is quashed. The matter is remitted to the Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella-Kharsawan for fresh consideration and disposal of the appeal in accordance with law. 12. This writ petition is, accordingly, allowed to the above extent.