JUDGMENT : SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J. 1. Heard Mr. Navaniti Prasad Singh, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Dhananjay Pathak, the learned vice counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. P.A.S. Pati, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/State. 2. This petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard. 3. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for directing the respondents to immediately and forthwith release the Tata Tipper (commercial heavy vehicle) of the petitioner bearing registration no. JH-10-AE-8280 which has been seized by the respondent Forest Area Officer, Chas Forest Area, Chas, Bokaro in connection with Offence Report No. 502 dated 03.02.2021 giving rise to C.P. (Forest) No. 133/2021 pending in the court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro for alleged offences under section 33, 52 and 64 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Bihar Amendment Act, 1989) and Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and in connection thereof a confiscation proceeding has also been initiated by the concerned Divisional Forest Officer, Bokaro against the petitioner. 4. Mr. Singh, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner at the outset submits that the vehicle in question is a commercial vehicle which cannot be left in open otherwise the same will be destroyed, which is against the mandate of law. According to him, the report with regard to the allegation is already there dated 17.08.2021 by the Regional Chief Conservator of Forest. He refers to point nos. (xiii) and (xiv) of the said report, apart from others, and submits that the D.F.O. Dhanbad keeping in view the opinion of G.P. Bokaro vide his letter no. 3128 dated 16.08.2000 has issued N.O.C. to C.O. Chas for mutation of the land in plot in question. He further submits that finding made with regard to the dispute has been provided to the said officer. At paragraph no. 12 of the said report wherein it has been stated that it put a question on the ability of the officer to understand the provisions of law and function of territorial D.F.O. as per the law. He further submits that finding made with regard to the dispute has been provided to the said officer. At paragraph no. 12 of the said report wherein it has been stated that it put a question on the ability of the officer to understand the provisions of law and function of territorial D.F.O. as per the law. He further submits that the petitioner has also approached under section 53 of the said Act before the C.O for release of the vehicle but no order has been passed and that is why the petitioner has been compelled to move before this Court. 5. Mr. P.A.S. Pati, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State submits that confiscation proceeding is also initiated and the petitioner has approached the authority concerned and this petition can be disposed of directing the confiscation officer to take a decision on the pending application of the petitioner. 6. In view of the above facts and considering the submissions of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties, the instant writ petition is being disposed of directing the respondent no. 3-D.F.O. Bokaro to take a decision on the pending application of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible but not later than three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 7. With the above observation and direction, the instant petition [W.P. (Cr.) No. 221 of 2021] stands disposed of.