High Court in its order dated 03.12.2021 passed in WPC No. 4950/ 21 was not followed by the respondents. He further submits that this Court on 13.01.2022 and on other various dates, protected the petitioners by strength of interim orders, the petitioners are still operating their saw mills. He further submits that the impugned notification Annexure P-2 was published, currency of notification was for a period of 3 years from the date of notification i.e. 13.08.2021. Since the period of 3 years has already over, the notification Annexure P-2 looses its significance and in light of above, the consequential order Annexure P-1 is also liable to be set aside. He further submits that another SLC meeting was convened which is filed as Annexure P-8 in WPC No.4986/2023 , the saw mills which were established prior to 12.12.1996, the restricted area would be of 4 kilometers and for other establishments, the restricted area is for ten kilometers from aerial root from the notified forest boundary. He submits that the decision of SLC has been forwarded to the respondent/ Union of India but still the Union of India has not taken decision on such State SLC. He though submits that there is all likelihood that after expiry of notification dated 13.08.2021, the State may again issue fresh notification which would affect the Rights of the petitioners and if such notification is published, the same would be contrary to the decision of SLC taken in the year 2019 and thereafter in the year 2022. Therefore in all fairness, the Union of India should take decision on the recommendation/decision made by the SLC in the year 2022 and for the present, these petitions may be disposed of directing the respondent/ Union of India to take decision on it and till then the interim order passed by this Court may continue to operate. He further submits that if any adverse decision is taken by the Union of India or any new notification is published by the State Government, the petitioners are at liberty to challenge the same and further
