Disposed

Anil Wood Pac Industry v. State of Telangana and 2 others

Telangana HC10 Apr 2023WP/21266/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the rejection of an exempted status for a furniture unit. The court granted liberty to apply under the new 2022 rules.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to submit a fresh application under G.O.Ms.No.69 dated 05.08.2022; respondents directed to consider it within six weeks.

Anil Wood Pac Industry Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

{

¶3

HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

MONDAY ,THE^{TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY THREE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICEJ SREENIVASRAO}

¶7

WRIT PETITIO NNO^{:21266 OF 2022}

¶8

Between:

¶9

Anil Wood PAC^{lndustry,Kondamadugu(V)'} Yadadri Diskict,^Telangana RepresenteO^{by its Propriet6r Sri K Anil Kumar}

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

State of Telangana^{and 2 others, Departmentof Environmentand Forest} through rts^{PrinciPal Secretary}

¶13

Pnncipal^{Chief Conservatorof ForestsAranyaBhavan' Saifabad'Hyderabad'} Telangana

¶14

District Forest Officer,^{Bhuvanagiri, Yadadri - Bhuvanagiri, Telangana}

¶15

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petitron under Article^{226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiledtherewith, the HighCourt maybe} preaseO to issue a Writ,^{in the nature of a Writ of Mandamusor anyother} lpjropriate Writ,^{dlrectionorder consideringthe petitioners furnitureunitas} "iir.it"O^{underthe provisionsof TelanganaWood Basedlndustries} fn"grtrtion.l^{Rules,20i6and further declaring the refusal orderRef' No'} aozitzOZl tSl dated^{1211212021by the respondents as illegal and votd '}

¶18

fA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶19

Petition under Section^{151 CPC praying that in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit ;r.p;; th; Seizure filed^{in support of Ot"O5lo3t2o22 the petition, along with Order the HighCourt may be Ref No 6025/2021lS3pleased} -to dated 12112t202.1 to^{operate the petitionerJfurniture unitpending disposalo-f the} above writ^petition and^{pass such furtheror other ordersas thls HonbleCourt} .rV 0"", iit anO^{propei in the circumstancesof the case' pendlng disposalof} the above writ Petition

j ! t

a j

IANO: 2 OF^2O22

Between:

State^{of Telangana and2 others' Departmentof Environmentand Forest} through^{its PrinciPalSecretarY}

¶25

Principal^{Chief Conservatorof Forests' AranyaBhavan' Saifabad'Hyderabad'} Telangana

¶26

3,DiStrictForestof{icer,Bhuvanagirr,Yadadri-BhUVanagiri,Telangana

¶27

....PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS^{1 TO 3}

¶28

Petition under^{Sectron 151CPC praying that in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit^{filed in suppori"ot inu p"titionl the HighCourt may be pleased} Dleased^{to drsmlss tn" rni"i' p"t'iion and vacate. the interim orders dated'} 5'i oii$)^{pl.t.J ," w P No 21266ot 2022in the interest of iustice}

¶29

Counsel^{for the Petitioner:SRI' RAMESHBABU}

¶30

Counsel for^{the Respondents:AGP FOR FORESTS}

¶31

The Court^{made the following:ORDER}

¶32

¶33

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SRETNTVAS RAO

¶34

WRIT PETITION No.21266 of 2022

¶35

ORDER:

¶36

This Writ petition is frled for seeking Writ oI Mandamus considering the petitioner's furniture unit as exempted under the provisions of "Telangana Wood Based Industries (Regulations) Rules, 2016" and further declaring the rejection order Ref.No.6025 /2021/ 53 dated 12.12.2021 issued by the respondents as illegal and void and pass such other order.

¶37

Heard Sri V. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assist?nt Government pleader for Forests appearing for respondent Nos. I to 3.

¶38

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests as u,ell as the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the Writ petition, the Government had framed the new rules and issued G.O.Ms.No.69, Environment, Forests, Science and Technology (For.l), Telangana Wood Based Industries (Regulations) Rules, 2022, dated O5.Oa.2O22 and the same was published in Telangana Gazette uide Gazette Notification No.16,

¶39

¶40

¶41

Hyderabad dated O5.O8,2022 and in vieu, of the same, thc cause in thc rvrit petition clocs not. survive.

¶42

In vieq, of the same, the Writ petition is disposed ol granting libcrtl, to the petitioner to submit fresh application as per rule G.O.Ms.No.69^dated Os.Oa.2022 irnd thereafter', the respondents are^directed to consider the same and pass appropriate^orders,in accordancc s,ith lau', u'ithin a^{period of six (6) weeks} thereafter.

¶43

A< cordingly, the Writ Petition is^disposedof.

¶44

No costs.

¶45

As a st'quel ther<:to, tniscellaneous applications,^if any, pending in this^{r"'nt pctition,shall stands closed.}

¶46

sDr-N.cl$lsD*t?.-tHs,ElR ,' j:

¶47

/,TRUE^COPYI/ SECTION^OFFICER

¶48

To,

¶49

1 State^{of Telangana Departmentof Environmentand Forest throughits} Eli'ji,irr'5""i6iary^{Secretanat Hvderabad}

¶50

2.^{Prrncipal Chref Conservatorof Forests' AranyaBhavan' Saifabad'Hyderabad'} Telangana

¶51

3-DistrictForeStofficer.BhuvanagirlYadadri-Bhuvanagiri.Telangana

¶52

4 One^{CC to SRIRAMESH BABU Advocate[OPUCI}

¶53

Two CCs^{to GP FOR FORESTS High Court for the Stateof Telangana} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶54

Two CD^Copres

I'SK

gt-,

I]S

HIGH COURT

DATED:1010412023

1r\E s l.A
[5 jr,ll{ 1r8

¶61

ORDER

¶62

WP.No.21266 of 2022

¶63

DISPOSING OF'THE^{WRTT PETITION}

¶64

WITHOUT COSTS

¶65

q.⁽ "ct*'t \qr_ ,--L-'-i,",-, \rl

Anil Wood Pac Industry v. State of Telangana and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Wood Pac Industry v. State of Telangana and 2 others

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

Kommineni Ramaiah Vs The Government of A.P.

Sapka Lingaiah and 6 Others Vs the Govt of Ap., Forest Dept., and 4 Others

A.P.State Schedule Tribes, Hyderabad. Vs the Prl.Secretary to Govt.,S.W.,Hyd.,and 9 Otrs.

M/s. Seghani Agro Tech Vs The State of Telangana

Gitte Namdev Vs The State of Telangana and 5 others

M/s . Narmada Industries Vs The State of Telangana