Disposed

M/s. Sri Krishna Sawmill, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Feb 2024WP/21866/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition regarding the non-renewal of a sawmill license, noting that the licensee had obtained regular renewals from 2016 to 2023 pursuant to interim orders. The court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh application for the 2024-2025 license renewal within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to submit fresh application for license renewal for 2024-2025 within six weeks; no interference till then.

M/s. Sri Krishna Sawmill, Vs The… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

•5,

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR /

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 21866 OF 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s. Sri Krishna Sawmill, Rep.by it's Proprietor J. Shankar Rao" S/o. Narasimham, aged about 51 yr$., R.S.Np.150/IB, Vadalamanu(V), Agiripalli(M) Krishna District, A.P.

¶9

...Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by it's Principal Secretary, Environment,Forests, Science & technology Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, for the State of A.P, Aranya Bhavan, Lakdi-Ka-Pool, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Chief Conservator of Forests, Rajahmundry Circle, Rajahmundry, E.G.pist.

¶14

The Divisional Forest Officer, Krishna Division, Vijayawada.

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in thp gircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 4^'^ respondent in not renewing the licence to the Vertical and Horizontal saws (31 HP) of M/s. Sri Krishna Sawmill, situated in R.$.No.150/1 B, Vadalamanu(V), Agiripalli(M), Krishna District, A.P., for the year 2016 as illegal, arbitrary, void and also offends Arts. 14, 19 & 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently renew the same.

¶17

¶18

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 26864 OF 2016)

¶19

^ A P^etition under Section 151 CPC praying that^{inthecircumstances} r ^tatedrm the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be iiiTeasec:f>;to-'direct the respondents 2 to 4 to permit^{thepetitionertorunthe} M/s. Srr'Krishna Sawmill situated in R.S.No.150/IB, Vadalamanu,(V), ■; ‘'V Agiripalli(M), Krishna District, A.P without causing any hindrance pending disposal of the main writ petition.

¶20

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WVMP. NO: 3715 OF 20161

¶21

Between:

¶22

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by it's Principal Secretary, Environment .Forests, Science & technology Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶23

The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, for the State of A.P, Arahya Bhavan, Lakdi-Ka-Pool, Hyderabad.

¶24

The Chief Conservator of Forests, Rajahmundry Circle, Rajahmundry, E.G.Dist.

¶25

The Divisional Forest Officer, Krishna Division, Vijayawada.

¶26

...Petitioners/Respondents

¶27

AND

¶28

M/s. Sri Krishna Sawmill, Rep.by it's Proprietor J.^{ShankarRao"S/o.} Narasimham, aged about 51 yrs., R.S.No. 150/IB, Vaddlamanu(V), Agiripalli(M) Krishna District, A.P.

¶29

...Respondent/Petitioner

¶30

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased td vacate the interim directions issued to the petitioner dated 08.07.2016 in WPMP.No. 26864 of 2016, in WP.No. 21866^of2016.

¶31

Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT I K ANNAPURNA

¶32

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR FORESTS

¶33

The Court made the following order:

¶34

APHC010167742016

¶35

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶36

PRESENT

¶37

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 21866 OF 2016

¶38

Between: M/§. Sri Krishna Sawmill, ...PETITIONER(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶39

...PETITIONER(S)

¶40

Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. I K ANNAPURNA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR FORESTS (AP) The Court made the folipwing:

¶41

¶42

ORDER:

¶43

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the

¶44

Constitution of India Seeking the following relief:-

¶45

"...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 4th respondent in not renewing the licence to the Vertical and Horizontal saws 31 HP.of M/s Sri Krishna Sawmill situated in R S No 150/IB VadalamanuV AgiripalliM^Krishna District A Pfor the year 2016 as illegal arbitrary void and also offends Arts 14 19 2l of the Constitution of India and consequently^renewthe same and to pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit arid proper in the circumMances of the case . ”

¶46

One Sri. V. V. Reddy was the original proprietor of^thesawmill i.e. M/s. Sri Krisna Sawmill and had obtained license from the 4^ respondent with one Vertical Saw of 31 HP. Thereafter, the petitioner herein has purchased, the said sawmill and submitted a representation dated 23.12.2009 along with sale deed to change the ownership^{ofthesawmilland} requested to shift the said sawmill in R.S.No. 150/IB, Vadlamanu(V), Agiripalli(M), Krishna District from West Godavari District. Basing on the instructions of the respondent dated 13.03.2010, the 4^^ respondent issued proceedings dated 03.05.2010 changing the ownership^ofthe said sawmill in the name of the petitioner and permitted the petitioner to shift the sawmill to the proposed location. Subsequently, vide memo dated 15.09.2010, the pt respondent accorded permission to^{thesaidsawmillfor} installing one Horizontal Saw band in addition to the existing vertical saw bands, subject to the condition that the capacity of the sawmill originally sanctioned by the licensing authority shall not be^increased.

¶47

While so, the 4^ respondent, being the licensing authority^for renewal,,.,b^, renewed the Saw mill license up to 2015 for only one vertical

¶48

¶49

saw instead of renewing license for both vertical saw and horizontal saws. Though the petitioner has submitted several representations to the respondents for renewal of license for bpth the saw machines, the respondents, instead of renewing the same, have orally stated that the petitioner s sawmill shall be shifted to a place which is beyond 5 kms from the reserved forest boundary, for renewal of his license. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the saw mill was shifted to the present location vide proceedings dated 13.03.2010 after the inspections conducted by the Deputy Range Officer and Forest Range Officer, the 4* respondent is insisting the petitioner to shift the sawmill to another locality which is beyond 5Kms from the nearest forest boundary, for renewing the license. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

¶50

4.When the writ petition came up for admission on 08.07.2016, this Court has passed the following interim order in W.P.M.P.No.26864 of 2016:

¶51

“There shall be interim direction as prayed for. However, this order shall not prevent the authorities to take action, if there is any violation by giving notice and following due process of law."

¶52

The 4* respondent has filed a counter affidavit- by denying the allegations raised by the petitioner and with regard to the inclusion of additional machineiy, it is stated that the Government has issued permission to Sri V.V. Reddy, who is the pervious owner of M/s Krishna Saw Mill, Nowduru of West Godavari District for installation of one Horizontal saw band in addition to the existing vertical saw bands in his Saw^Mill.Itis

¶53

further submitted that the following clarification has been issued by the Hon'ble Central Empowered Committee in respect of installation^ofaddition of horizontal and vertical saw in existing sawmill^license:

¶54

"The grant of permission for installation of additional VBS or IIBS or peeling unit or for operating plywood pasting unit by a licensed sawmill is permissible only after obtaining prior/concurrence of the CEC". Further,^{theCBChasalsostatedthat} such permissions have been granted in violation of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. ”

¶55

Basing on the aforementioned clarification, the Government^has issued orders vide Govt. Memo 4331/ Section. II /2014, EPS & T (Sec.II) Department, dated 26-07-2014 cancelling all the orders issued by permitting additional machineiy and issued instructions^totakeaction to cancel all the permissions.. Accordingly, the Principal^{ChiefConservatorof} Forests (HoFF), Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabadand Chief Conservator of Forests, Rajahmuhdry circle, Rajahmundiy. have also^{issuedinstructionsto} take action to delete all the additional machinery from the sawmill licenses. which were included after the Hon'ble Supreme Court orders, dated 30-102002 in W.P.No.202/95. Vide Prl.CCF (HoFF), A.P., Hyderabad Ref 15361/2011/Prod.-3, dated 31-07-2014 and CCF, Rajahmundry Rc. 5776/2010-M4, dated 05-08-2014. Hence inclusion of additional machineiy is not permitted since it is as against the Hon'ble supreme court orders and instructions of the superior officers.

¶56

The Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Officers, Vijayawada has issued instructions vide RC. No,.CN0.116/RV&EO, VJA/NR/FRO/2014 dated 07.10.2014 to the respondent Office to submit^{thelistofsawmills} located within 5 Kms from nearest Reserve Forest areas. In view of the

¶57

above, instructions were issued to all Forest Range Officers of 4* respondent Division tQ verify the locations of sawmills with reference tp the latitudes and longitudes. The Forest Range Officer has submitted his preliminary report over phone stating that the petitioners sawmill is situated within 5 Kms radius from nearest Edara Reserve Forest. Further it is submitted that after receipt of the final report from the inspecting officer i.e., Forest Range Officer, Nuzvid, the license will be renewed as per the recommendations of the Forest Range Officer, Nuzvid.

¶58

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Forests.

¶59

Today when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Fprests has produced a copy pf instructions of the ’ . District Forest Officer, Eluru District, vide Rc.No.2288/2010-S3 , dated 15.02.2024, wherein it is stated that in pursuance of the interim orders dated 08.07.2016, the. petitioner has paid renewal fee for the years 20162023 and is running the said saw mill all these years, basing on the interim order passed by this Court.

¶60

IQ. On a perusal of the interim order granted on 08.07.2016, it is clear that the respondents were directed to permit the petitioner to run the subject saw mill without causing any hindrance and were at liberty to proceed against the petitioner by giving notice and by following due process of law, if there is any violation. However, as per thie instructions, it is clear that the respondent authorities have renewed the liqense of the petitioner’s saw mill regularly from 2016 to 2023.

¶61

In view of the same, this Court feels it appropriate^todisposeof the writ petition by directing the petitioner to submit^{afreshapplicationfor} renewal of the sawmill license for the present year^{2024-2025andthesame} may be considered by the respondent authorities in accordance with law. The said process shall be completed within a period^{ofsix(6)weeks,from} the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such^{time,therespondentsare} directed not to. interfere with the petitioner’s saw^mill.

¶62

is 12. Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition

¶63

disposed of. There shall be nO order as to costs,

¶64

shall also As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, stand closed. Sd/- S.SRINIVASA PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAB-' //TRUE COPY// SE OFFICER

¶65

To,

¶66

1 Th6 Principal Secretary, Environment, Forests, Science^&Technology Dept., State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶67

The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, for^{theStateofA.P,Aranya} Bhavan, Lakdi-Ka-Pool, Hyderabad.

¶68

3 The Chief Conservator of Forests, Rajahmundry Circle,^Rajahmundry, E.G.Dist.

¶69

The Divisional Forest Officer, Krishna Division,^Vijayawada.

¶70

One CC to Smt I K Annapurna, Advocate [OPUC]

¶71

Two CCS to GP for Forests, High Court of Andhra Pradesh.^[OUT]

¶72

Two CD Copies

RAM

HIGH COURT

DATED:22/02/2024

ORDER

WP.No.21866 of 2016

S 3 t JUL 202^ a
Current Section

¶79

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

M/s. Sri Krishna Sawmill, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Sri Krishna Sawmill, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaida Moula D.Ei.Ed College Vs the State of Ap

Convention of Baptist Vs the State of Ap

Bandi Sekhar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Saraswathi College of Education, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Repalle Christian College of Education Vs the State of Ap

Sri Saraswathi B.Ed College Vs the State of Ap