Per D.S. Thakur, J. 1. The present petition has been filed in public interest by Mahi Geeran and Singara Kashan Association representing the `Fishermen' community, which has been declared to be a weak and under privileged class under SRO 126. The petitioners primarily seek the enforcement of the right of the `Fishermen' community in regard to obtaining timber for construction of boats on concessional rates as also to declare them entitled to obtain ration under the Antodaya Annayojna Scheme (AAY scheme) of the CAPD department. 2. The petitioners place reliance upon a letter dated 29th of October, 2009 addressed by Conservator of Forests, Central Circle, Srinagar to Chief Conservator of Forests, Kashmir, which according to them, buttresses their case for supply of timber for construction of boats from the sale depots of the State Forest Corporation. 3. Reference to this letter is relevant and is reproduced hereunder: "Government of Jammu & Kashmir Office of the Pr. Chief Conservator of Forests Srinagar. The Chief Conservator of Forests, Kashmir No. PCCF/Lease/timber/Fmen/1137                                                                                                                        Dated 29-10-2009 Subject: Grant of timber in favour of fisherman (Kashtee Bakhan Hanjees) for construction of Boats. Sir, Please refer to your letter No. CCFK/L/09/2423-24 dt 29-09-2009 on the subject and to inform you that the timber is being granted by the Forest Department to the locals residing in A, B and C zones areas or the State on concessional rates in terms of Govt. Order No. 278-FST of 2006 dated 19-5-2006 read with Govt. Order No. 282-FST of 2008 dated 18-6-2008. Since the fishermen in question require timber for construction of boats (Shikaras) for fishing purpose, they cannot be supplied timber from sale depots. Therefore, they may be advised to approach the Managing Director, State Forest Corporation for the purpose. This issues with the approval of Pr. CCF. Yours faithfully (Manzoor Ahmad) IFS Conservator of Forests, Central Circle, Srinagar. 4. Reply affidavit has been filed by the Principal, Chief Conservator of Forests in which a specific stand has been taken that the department of Forests issues timber on concession rates to persons residing in Zone-A (within three kilometres from demarcated forests), Zone-B (within five-eight kilometres from demarcated forests) and Zone-C (beyond eight kilometres from demarcated forests) for construction of residential houses. The said timber is, however, supplied after completing formalities and by conducting on spot verification, which includes supporting photographs of the house/site for which the timber is required. 5. The said timber is, however, supplied after completing formalities and by conducting on spot verification, which includes supporting photographs of the house/site for which the timber is required. 5. According to the official stand, timber is supplied only upon satisfaction that it is really required for constructing the residential house. The said timber is supplied subject to availability of stocks in order to prevent misuse of timber keeping into consideration its high cost in the open market. 6. It is the specific stand of the official respondents that there is no policy of the Govt. which obliges the State to provide timber (Deodar) wood to the petitioners for construction of their boats on concessional rates. It is, however, stated that in case they fall under Zone A, B and C, they are being provided timber for construction of their houses according to the policy in vogue. 7. According to the learned counsel for the respondents, the State Forest Corporation has fair price outlets, who sell timber to consumers on reasonable rate. The `Fishermen' community, according to the learned counsel had already been advised by the official respondents to approach the J&K, State Forest Corporation for the issuance of timber for construction of their boats. 8. The stand of the official respondents appears to be clear and unambiguous. Even letter dated 29th of October, 2009 upon which the petitioners place reliance supports and reiterates the stand taken by the official respondents that the timber is given on concessional rates in accordance with the categorization of the zones and not with reference to a community as such. 9. Be that as it may, the prayer as regards grant of timber on concessional basis to the `Fishermen' community is found to be untenable and is accordingly rejected. 10. The other prayer made by the petitioners is that since the petitioners belonged to the under privileged classes, as identified under SRO 126, they are entitled to be placed in the AAY Scheme (Antodaya Annayojna Scheme) of the Food and Supplies Department. A reference in this regard can be made to the letter dated 5th of February, 2003 written by Assistant Director (Planning), Directorate of Food and Supplies, Kashmir wherein it was desired that the fishermen be considered for being brought under AAY Scheme if they are falling under BPL category after proper verification. A reference in this regard can be made to the letter dated 5th of February, 2003 written by Assistant Director (Planning), Directorate of Food and Supplies, Kashmir wherein it was desired that the fishermen be considered for being brought under AAY Scheme if they are falling under BPL category after proper verification. It appears from the said letter that the scheme is applicable to only those, who are below the poverty line and is not generally for the benefit of a particular community. 11. Certainly, if the petitioners fall under the BPL category and satisfy the conditions of the scheme as applicable, they would be entitled to get the benefit under the AAY Scheme. However, every individual case would then be verified by the concerned authorities of the CAPD Department as is reflected by letter dated 5th of February, 2003 by Assistant Director (planning), Directorate of Food and Supplies Department, which refers to grant of ration to members of the `Fishermen' community, if they fall under the BPL category. 12. The petition is, thus, found without any merit and is accordingly dismissed along with interim application No. 1176/2013.