Disposed

Ramesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC5 Jan 2018CWJC/17645/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the District Magistrate, Rohtas, under the Indian Forest Act, 1927, to expeditiously dispose of pending confiscation appeals within three months. It further ordered provisional release of vehicles after four weeks if the appeal remains undecided due to reasons attributable to the authority.

What did the court decide?

Direction to District Magistrate to dispose of appeal within three months and consider provisional release of vehicles within four weeks if not disposed.

Ramesh Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17613 of 2017

¶3

=========================================================== Anil Singh son of Raja Singh resident of village - Dubauli, P.O. Dularpur, Police Station - Garhani, District - Bhojpur.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner Versus

¶5

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Forest and Environment, Bihar, Patna.

¶6

The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.

¶7

The Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram.

¶8

The Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorised Officer, Rohtas, Forest Division, Rohtas at Sasaram.

¶9

.... .... Respondents with

¶10

=========================================================== Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17645 of 2017

¶11

=========================================================== Ramesh Yadav, Son of Ram Raj Singh, Resident of Village- Nooranganj, P.S.Sasaram, District- Rohtas.

¶12

.... .... Petitioner

¶13

Versus

¶14

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Forest and Environment, Bihar, Patna.

¶15

The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram. 3. The Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorised Officer, Rohtas Forest Division, Rohtas at Sasaram.

¶16

The Forester, Tilauthu Forest Range, Rohtas.

¶17

.... .... Respondents

¶18

with

¶19

=========================================================== Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18886 of 2017

¶20

===========================================================

¶21

Md. Ibrahim Siddique, son of Sakkar Siddique, resident of village + P.S. Kachhawa, District Rohtas

¶22

.... .... Petitioner

¶23

Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Forest and Environment, Bihar, Patna.

¶24

The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.

¶25

The Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorised Officer, Rohtas Forest Division, Rohtas at Sasaram.

¶26

The Forester, Tilauthu Forest Range, Rohtas.

¶27

.... .... Respondents

¶28

===========================================================

¶29

Appearance : (In CWJC No.17613 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP14

¶30

Patna High Court CWJC No.17613 of 2017 dt.05-01-2018

¶31

¶32

(In CWJC No.17645 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Awanish Nandan Singh, GP-21 (In CWJC No.18886 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Gajendra Pd.Yadav, SC17

¶33

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 05-01-2018

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

¶35

The grievance of the petitioners is that the confiscation proceeding has been decided against the petitioners and the appeals are pending before the appellate authority, who in the present matters would be the District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram under the Indian Forest Act, 1927. It is the grievance of the petitioners that while the disposal of the appeal is delayed, the vehicle stands confiscated and left to face vagaries of weather, would ultimately render it obsolete by a delayed disposal. It is in these circumstances that these petitioners have come before this Court praying for a direction to the appellate authority i.e. the District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram to dispose of the respective appeal expeditiously and in case of unwanted delay consider their prayer for provisional release of their vehicles.

¶36

In my opinion, the prayer made by the petitioners in this batch of writ petitions is just and proper for in the statutory appeal of the present nature where the goods seized are liable to decay and would become obsolete by passage of time, the appeal requires an

¶37

Patna High Court CWJC No.17613 of 2017 dt.05-01-2018

¶38

¶39

expeditious disposal and in the circumstances so discussed, I hereby direct the District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram, the appellate authority under the Indian Forest Act, to consider and dispose of the appeal of the petitioners herein in accordance with law and after opportunity of hearing to the petitioners expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order and in case for any reason not attributable to these petitioners the appeal is not disposed of within the period stipulated above, the appellate authority shall consider the prayer of the petitioners for provisional release of their respective vehicles which are subject matter of the proceeding and dispose of the same in accordance with law preferably within four weeks of expiry of the period stipulated above.

¶40

With the observations/ directions aforementioned, the writ petitions are disposed of.

¶41

(Jyoti Saran, J)

¶42

Surendra/-

¶43

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
UploadingDate	06.01.2018
Transmission Date	NA

Ramesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

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

Hansraj Singh Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Kameshwar Prasad Yadav and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dr. Urmila Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Ibrahim Siddique Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Anil Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Chandan Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.