Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 418 (JHR)

Nirmal Kumar Agarwal v. State of Jharkhand

2013-04-01

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2013
ORDER 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner is seeking direction upon the respondent no. 3, District Forest Officer, Forest Division, Dhanbad to grant permission to make necessary change in the partnership deed by incorporating a new partner namely Nityanand Giri in the Saw Mill running in the name and style of M/s Dhanbad Timber Works under License No. F/DH/14/2009, as the same is now a proprietorship firm' of the petitioner only, which he intends to convert into partnership concerned. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the District Divisional Forest Officer, Dhanbad had earlier rejected his application by a cryptic order though there was a report contained in Annexure-4 dated 18.8.2009 in respect of the petitioner's Saw Mill itself that it is situated' at 8 Kilometers far from prohibited forest area. In appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority-cum-Conservator of the Forest, Bokaro Circle, by order dated 27.7.2010, D.F.O.-Dhanbad was directed to pass a speaking order after hearing the parties as per Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990 vide Annexure-6. However, vide order dated 26.8.2010, Annexure-7, the D.F.O., Dhanbad once again has rejected his application for transfer of the proprietorship business of the petitioner to a partnership firm acting upon the reports of the Assistant Conservator of Forest submitted in the month of December, 2008 itself. 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that the respondents themselves have renewed the license of the petitioner till December, 2008 but are not allowing the petitioner to convert his proprietorship business into a partnership firm for exigencies of his business operations as the petitioner himself is now old and not in a physical and financial position to run the Saw Mill alone. 5. It is the contention of the petitioner that once again he has preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority against the order dated 27.9.2010 in Appeal Case No. 1 of 2010 wherein the Conservator of Forest, Bokaro Circle, Bokaro, once again ordered that the petitioner will submit fresh application to D.F.O., Dhanbad with partnership deed and power of attorney of his proposed partner namely Nityanand Giri, whereafter the D.F.O., Dhanbad, after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner shall pass a necessary order under the provisions of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990 and under the guidelines issued by the Central Empowered Committee, New Delhi. It is further contended, that in spite of repeated remand by the Appellate Authority, the D.F.O., Dhanbad has not taken any informed decision in accordance with law and the petitioner has been left with no option but to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court in this writ petition. 6. Counsel for the petitioner has objected the contention of the respondents through the affidavit that the report of the Assistant Conservator of Forest shows that the Saw Mill is situated within 1.75 Kilometers from the prohibited forest area without substantiating any documents in support thereof and contrary to what has been reported vide Annexure-4 dated 18.8.2009. It is also contended that the respondents have stated that the petitioner has not been operating the Saw Mill since last 2-3 years but the respondents have themselves renewed the licence till December, 2012. 7. Counsel for the respondent-State on the other hand has contested the claim of the petitioner relying upon the averments made in the counter affidavit that the petitioner's Saw Mill has been found to be closed since last two years and he has sought to induct a partnership in the name of Nityanand Giri without seeking permission from the respondent-authority has also reiterated the stand of the respondent taken in the affidavit that the petitioner's Saw Mill is situated within 1.75 Kilometers from the prohibited forest area and as such the application of the petitioner has not been allowed. 8. I have heard counsel for the parties at length. From what has been recorded hereinabove, it appears that after remand by the Appellate Authority vide memo no. 873 dated 27.9.2010, the respondent, Divisional Forest Officer, Dhanbad has not passed any order upon the application of the petitioner seeking change in the proprietorship business to that of partnership by incorporating a partner namely Nityanand Giri. It is the stand of the respondent that the petitioner's Saw Mill is located within a distance of 1.75 Kilometers from the prohibited forest area, which is also contested by the petitioner on the basis of document contained in Annexure-4 issued by the Forester, addressed to Forest Range Officer, Urban Forest Range dated 18.8.2009. 9. It is the stand of the respondent that the petitioner's Saw Mill is located within a distance of 1.75 Kilometers from the prohibited forest area, which is also contested by the petitioner on the basis of document contained in Annexure-4 issued by the Forester, addressed to Forest Range Officer, Urban Forest Range dated 18.8.2009. 9. Be that as it may, the petitioner is required to produce the necessary copies of the partnership deed as well as the power of attorney on behalf of the proposed partner by making a fresh application before D.F.O., Dhanbad in terms of the order passed in Appeal by the Conservator of Forest, Bokaro Circle, Bokaro to enable the D.F.O., Dhanbad to take appropriate decision in accordance with law for seeking such change in proprietorship business of the petitioner's Saw Mill to that of partnership. 10. In that view of the matter the issues raised in the present writ petition are required to be squarely addressed by the respondent no.3-District Forest Officer, Forest Division, Dhanbad. The petitioner is allowed to approach the respondent no. 3 once again by making an application together with all supporting facts and documents including the proposed partnership deed and power of attorney as also the presence of the proposed partner, he wants to incorporate by converting his proprietorship business .into partnership concern within a period of three weeks. On receipt of such application, respondent no.3-District Forest Officer, Forest Division, Dhanbad shall consider the same in accordance with law as also the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990 and guidelines issued by the Central Empowered Committee from time to time after verification of the site as also ascertainment of the actual position relating to the location of the petitioner's Saw Mill from the prohibited forest area and thereafter pass a reasoned and speaking order in respect of his application within a period of twelve weeks, which shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 11. The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations.