Kerala High Court
Timberland Ply And Boards vs High Range Circle Chief Forest ... on 16 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 27TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 15918 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
TIMBERLAND PLY AND BOARDS,
MANIKINAR, PAIMATTOM, PALLARIMANGLAM, KOTHAMANGALAM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BEING REPRESENTED BY IT MANAGING PARTNER,
SUBHAN NAZAR. S/O. ABDUL NAZAR., AGED 33 YEARS,
RESIDING AT ERACKAL HOUSE, KOTHAMANGLAM, MANIKINAR P.O,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686693
BY ADVS.
K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR
P.K.MINIMOLE
A.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR
BAPPU GALIB SALAM
MUHAMMED ASHIQUE
G.MOTILAL
RESPONDENT/S:
1 HIGH RANGE CIRCLE CHIEF FOREST CONSERVATOR KOTTAYAM
CONSERVOR OF FORESTS INSPECTION AND EVALUATION OFFICE,
KUMARANALLOOR, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN - 686016
2 THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER AND AUTHORISED OFFICER
KOTHAMANGALAM, DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICE,
KOTHAMANGALAM, KERALA, PIN - 686666
SRI. V VENUGOPAL , GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 15918 OF 2024 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a partnership firm, primarily engaged in
the manufacture of ply wood, veneer sheets, wood products etc.
Ext.P1 is the license dated 03.08.2023 issued by the 2 nd
respondent, granting permission to the petitioner to conduct its
business. By Ext.P3 order dated 19.03.2024 of the 2 nd
respondent, Ext.P1 license was cancelled stating that the
distance of the petitioner establishment from the nearby forest
area is only 4.69 kms which is lesser than the mandatory distance
of 5 Kms, prescribed in the Forest Rules. Against Ext.P3 order,
the petitioner has preferred Ext.P8 appeal and Ext.P9 stay
petition before the Appellate Authority. The only relief now
sought for by the petitioner is an expeditious disposal of Exts.P8
appeal and P9 stay petition.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits
that though Ext.P3 order was issued after hearing the petitioner
on 28.02.2024, the contentions of the petitioner in Ext.P5
application and Ext.P6 report were not considered while passing
the said order.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and having
regard to the limited nature of relief sought for by the petitioner,
I am of the opinion that this writ petition can be disposed of,
directing the Appellate Authority to consider and pass
appropriate orders on Exts.P8 and P9 as expeditiously as
possible.
Accordingly, the Appellate Authority is directed to consider
and pass orders on Ext.P9 stay petition, after affording an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as
possible, at any rate within a period of two months. The Appellate
Authority shall dispose of Ext.P8 appeal within a period of four
months thereafter. I make it clear that I have not expressed any
opinion on the merits of the matter and it will be open to the
Appellate Authority to decide the matter, in accordance with the
law.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
JUDGE
ajt
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15918/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE NO.
BI/KGLM/VII/21/2023 DATED 03.08.2023
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM IB
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. KFDDO/24093/2023-
DFOKGLM L1 DATED 19.03.2024
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20.02.2024
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 27.02.2024
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 08.02.2023
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 01.08.2023
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL IN FORM VII DATED
09.04.2024 ALONG WITH THE AFFIDAVIT
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED
09.04.2024
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT SHOWING RECEIPT
