Dismissed a writ petition challenging an order requiring joint application for shifting a saw mill location. The court held the requirement was not infirm as the partnership deed allowed business changes with mutual consent.
Writ petition and interlocutory application disposed of as the appellate order suffered no infirmity.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12619 of 2014
====================================================== Yogeshwar Prasad son of Sri Sheetal Prasad, resident of village-Govindpur, P.S.- Fatuha, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Conservation of Forest- cum- Prescribed Authority, Patna Circle, Patna Joint Forest Bhawan, Nehru Nagar, Patna. 4. The Divisional Forest Officer, cum Licensing authority, Patna Division, Patna, Nehru, Nagar. 5. Ram Janam Mistry Son of Late Budhan Mistry, resident of villageGovindpur, P.S.- Fatuha, District- Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Udit Narayan Singh, Advocate Mr. Ganjendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kumar Alok, SC-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 2 02-02-2015 Heard Mr. Udit Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Gajendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for the private respondent. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 16.5.2014 passed by the Conservator of Forest-cum-prescribed authority the respondent no. 3 in Appeal Case No. 3 of 2013 whereby the appellate authority while allowing the appeal preferred by the private respondent has required the petitioner to file any application for shifting the place of saw mill.
The fact of the case briefly stated is that the petitioner and the private respondent formed a partnership firm under a deed
Patna High Court CWJC No.12619 of 2014 (2) dt.02-02-2015
2
of partnership executed on 16.5.1986 for carrying on trade of purchase and sale of timber and fire wood of all kinds as also for carrying into trading business. The partnership was to be carried out in the name of M/s Jugeshwar Prasad Vijay Kumar Timber Merchant at Fatuha in the district of Patna. Clause-7 of the partnership provided that the private respondent would be represented by his son for the management of the partnership business. The partnership firm applied for a license under the provisions of the Bihar Saw Mill Regulation Act, 1990 and the Rules framed thereunder and were granted license bearing License No. 54 of 1994, a copy of which is placed at Annexure-2 to the writ application. The firm carries on its business on the land bearing Khata No. 132, Plot No. 44, Thana No. 16 at Fatuha in the district of Patna. The petitioner filed an application before the licensing authority for shifting the place of the saw mill from its present location at Plot No. 44 of Khata No. 132 to Plot No. 167 of Khata No. 52. The application filed by the petitioner was allowed by the licensing authority vide order passed on 4.1.2011 placed at Annexure-3 and which was questioned by the private respondent before the prescribed authority i.e. the Conservator of Forest in Appeal No. 3 of 2013 and the appellate authority by the impugned order bearing Memo No. 844 dated 17.5.2014 has allowed the appeal with a liberty to the petitioner and the private respondent
Patna High Court CWJC No.12619 of 2014 (2) dt.02-02-2015
3
to file any application for change of the saw mill and being aggrieved the petitioner is before this Court.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and I have perused the materials on record. It is an admitted position that the license is in the name of the partnership firm and the deed of partnership present at Annexure-6 and paragraph-3 thereof provides that the partners would be at liberty to change the nature of business as also the place of business with mutual consent. This Clause of the partnership deed is binding on the petitioner as well as the private respondent and in this background of the matter, the order passed by the appellate authority requiring the petitioner and the private respondent to file a joint application in case they want to change the location of the saw mill, suffers from no infirmity warranting any interference.
For the reasons aforementioned, the writ petition as well as the interlocutory application bearing I.A. No. 5898 of 2014 are disposed of.
(Jyoti Saran, J)
S.Sb/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellate authority was correct to require the petitioner and private respondent to file a joint application to change the location of the saw mill.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Yogeshwar Prasad
The State of Bihar
The Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
The Conservation of Forest-cum- Prescribed Authority, Patna Circle, Patna
The Divisional Forest Officer, cum Licensing authority, Patna Division, Patna
Ram Janam Mistry
Jyoti Saran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
