Patna High Court
Anuj Sharma vs The State Of Bihar on 28 January, 2025
Author: Rajesh Kumar Verma
Bench: Rajesh Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16764 of 2022
======================================================
Anuj Sharma son of Raju Sharma Resident of village- Charan Bigha, P.S.-
Mali, District- Aurangabad (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Environment and Forest
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest-cum-Chairman of State Level
Committee for Wood-based Industries, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Licensing Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Aurangabad Forest
Division, Aurangabad.
4. The Forester, Nabinagar, P.S.- Nabinagar, District
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinay Mistry, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 28-01-2025
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:
"(i) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari
for quashing of the order dated 15.09.2022 bearing
Memo No. 1981 dated 15.09.2022 (Annexure-6),
passed by the Licensing Officer-Cum-Divisional Forest
Officer, Aurangabad Forest Division, Aurangabad,
whereby the seized articles has not been released to the
petitioner which was seized by the Forester, Nabinagar,
Aurangabad on 23.06.2022 (Annexure-2) as the
Forester is not authorized to make inspection, search
and seizure of saw mills Under Section-8 of the Bihar
Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16764 of 2022 dt.28-01-2025
(ii) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus
directing the Respondent authorities to release the
seized materials in favour of the petitioner and further
be pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere the
operation of 18" diameter saw mill to the petitioner for
manufacturing of furniture in the facts and
circumstances of the case."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as
per the recommendation of the Central Empowered Committee
(hereinafter referred to as "CEC"), the State of Bihar has
accepted the proposal of the CEC dated 11.06.2008 and
subsequently the Department of Environment & Forest,
Government of Bihar issued a resolution dated 24.12.2022 in
which it is stated that a Saw Mill with a diameter upto 18",
whether it is vertical or horizontal will not required to be
registered, but they should be used only for the carpentry work,
for making furniture etc. and not for commercial saving and
they would not use round logs, rather they would use sawn
timber in small sizes.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has established 18" diameter saw mill for
manufacturing of furniture. However, on 23.06.2022, the
Respondent No. 4 (Forester, Nabinagar, Aurangabad) seized 18"
diameter saw mill alongwith other equipments from the
furniture shop of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16764 of 2022 dt.28-01-2025
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
from bare perusal of the seizure list (Annexure-2), it appears
that seized articles were within the purview of the State
Government's resolution dated 24.12.2012.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
aforesaid articles have been seized under Section 8 of the Bihar
Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990 and Forester has no power to
take action against the petitioner.
7. Learned counsel for the State on the basis of filed
counter-affidavit submits that seizure has been made in
accordance with law and diameter size of the saw mill is 42"
and the petitioner has not produced any documents, which
suggests that diameter size of the seized saw mill was 18".
8. Pursuant to the direction of this Court, State
authority has filed a supplementary counter-affidavit annexing
therein photographs of the saw mill in question, which suggests
that trolley and round timber were available at the saw mill of
the petitioner and seizure of trolley and round timber suggests
that the same is 42" in diameter, which is illegal and violates the
provisions of Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention
to the seizure list (Annexure-2) and submits that it appears from
Patna High Court CWJC No.16764 of 2022 dt.28-01-2025
the perusal of the Annexure-2 that authority has not mentioned
the diameter of the seized articles (round logs).
10. In view of the aforesaid, it appears that seizure of
articles was in accordance with the resolution of the State
Government dated 24.12.2012. Apart from that, according to the
aforesaid resolution, the Forester is not authorized to make
inspection and to search and seize the saw mill of the petitioner.
11. Accordingly, the order dated 15.09.2022
(Annexure-2) is set aside and authority concerned is directed to
release the seized articles of the petitioner forthwith.
12. The writ petition stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Shahnawaz/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 31.01.2025
Transmission Date 31.01.2025
