Disposed

Dinesh Kumar T.K. v. the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Forest Land and Resources) and Nodal Officer

Kerala HC10 Aug 2022WP(C)/6874/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Divisional Forest Officer to consider the petitioner's application for a sawmill license, allowing an opportunity for hearing and document production, with a time limit of four months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application for license after affording an opportunity of hearing and production of documents within two months of receipt.

Dinesh Kumar T.K. Vs the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Forest Land and Resources) and Nodal Officer — Kerala HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 19TH SRAVANA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 6874 OF 2020

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

DINESH KUMAR T.K.
AGED 56 YEARS, S/O LATE SANKAPPA,
M/S DINESH SAWMILL AND VENEERS KAJAPPADAVU, PATHUR
P.O.MANJESWAR TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
M.SANTHI (K/868/2011)
SRI.G.RANJU MOHAN

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (FOREST LAND
AND RESOURCES) AND NODAL OFFICER
FOREST CONSERVATION ACT AND CAMPA, FOREST HEADQUARTERS,
VAHUTHACADU, C-695 014.

¶10

2 DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KANNUR DIVISION, KASARAGOD-671 121.

¶11

3 RANGE FOREST OFFICER, KANJANGADU RANGE, KASARGODU-671 325

¶12

4 VARKADY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, VORKADY P.O.KASARAGODU DISTRICT-671 323.

¶13

5 SECRETARY VORKADY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VORKADY P.O.KASARGODU DISTRICT-671 323.

¶14

BY ADVS.
GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.T.MADHU
SHRI.GANGADHARAN NAIR M.
SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO. 6874 OF 2020

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT Dated this the 10^th day of August, 2022

¶19

The petitioner is the owner of the sawmill situated in

¶20

Manjeswaram Taluk, Kasargod District. According to the petitioner, he had purchased the sawmill from its previous owner in the year 2006 and the previous owner had been running the sawmill prior to 30.10.2002. After purchasing the sawmill, petitioner submitted an application for renewing the NOC of his wood based industry. Much later the petitioner received Ext.P11 communication dated 17.01.2018, stating that the petitioner’s application stands rejected, since the D&O register produced by him is not an authorised document. Thereafter, the petitioner was served with Ext.P12 order dated 12.02.2020, alleging that the petitioner’s sawmill is functioning without licence from the Forest Department, which is an offence under Rule 3 of the Kerala Forest (Regulation of Sawmills and Other Wood Based Industrial Units) Rules 2012. Under Ext.P12, the petitioner was required to close down the unit

¶21

WP(C) NO. 6874 OF 2020

¶22

¶23

immediately. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P13 application for grant of licence under the Kerala Forest (Regulation of Sawmills and other wood based industrial units) Rules 2012.

¶24

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in possession of sufficient evidence to prove that the sawmill was functioning much prior to 30.10.2002. The petitioner is confident that, if Ext.P13 application is considered dispassionately, he will be able to obtain the licence.

¶25

Learned Special Government Pleader submitted that a proper decision will be taken on Ext.P13, depending on the evidence produced regarding the functioning of petitioner’s sawmill prior to 30.10.2002.

¶26

The Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the second respondent to consider Ext.P13 and to take appropriate decision thereon, after affording opportunity of hearing and for production of document to the petitioner. The decision, as directed above, shall be taken within two

¶27

WP(C) NO. 6874 OF 2020

¶28

¶29

months of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

V.G.ARUN

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

RK

¶34

WP(C) NO. 6874 OF 2020

¶35

¶36

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6874/2020

¶37

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF
THE LICENCE FEES & DEMAND REGISTER
MAINTAINED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT GRAMA
PANCHAYATH

¶38

EXHIBIT P2THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED
BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT GRAMA PANCHAYATH
EXHIBIT P3THE TRUE COPY OF THE D& O LICENCE ISSUE
BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT GRAMA PANACHAYATH
EXHIBIT P4THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOC ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
29.8.2006 BEARING REFERENCE NO KG
5713/06 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPIES OF D & O LINCESE FOR THE
PERIOD 2010-2011
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPIES OF D & O LINCESE FOR THE
PERIOD 2011-2012
EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPIES OF D & O LINCESE FOR THE
PERIOD 2015-2016
EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPIES OF D & O LINCESE FOR THE
PERIOD 2016-2017
EXHIBIT P10THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P11THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION
DATED 17.1.2018 BEARING NO FC 6-
54692/2017 FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P12THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
12.2.2020 BEARING NO KGE-1768/19 BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P13THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
LICENSE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
WITH CHALAN AND TYPED VERSION OF
EXHIBIT P13(2) TO P13 (6)
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R3 ATHE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
12/9/2002 SUBMITTED BY SMT.M.A SAHIRA
BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT.

¶39

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶40

¶41

WP(C) NO. 6874 OF 2020

¶42

Exhibit P14

¶43

THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING
NO.FC3-879/2021 DATED 24/05/2021 ISSUED
BY THE FOREST DEPARTMENT.

Dinesh Kumar T.K. v. the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Forest Land and Resources) and Nodal Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Kumar T.K. v. the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Forest Land and Resources) and Nodal Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Husain.M Vs Perinthalmanna Municipality

K.C.Parvathy Vs the Executive Engineer, Kerala Water Authority

Sherly Thomas Vs the Deputy General Manager

Mohammed Eqbal K.S. Vs Union of India

Vishnu T.S Vs the District Collector,Thrissur

Kerala Vyapari Vyavasayi Ekopana Samithi Vs State of Kerala