Raj Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15528 of 2013 ====================================================== Raj Kumar Sah, son of Jagdish Sah, resident of Village- Mirjapur Dhowahi, P.S. Sheohar, District- Sheohar .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Commissioner-Cum-Chairman, District Selection Committee, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur
3. The Secretary, Environment and Forest Department, Muzaffarpur
4. The Chief Forest Conservator Officer, Muzaffarpur
5. The Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Member Secretary, District Selection Committee, Muzaffarpur .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. AC to GP-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to GP-11.
In the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for directing the Respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of Saw Mill Licence. It has been claimed that he has already applied for licence before the licensing authority on 09.04.2011. Alternatively, a prayer is being made for directing the authorities concerned to dispose of his representation. Learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer to the extent that the Respondents may be directed to dispose of the representation, which was filed by him in respect of grant of
Patna High Court CWJC No.15528 of 2013 (4) dt.21-08-2015 2/2 licence of Saw Mill. He submits that he had approached the licensing authority vide Annexure-2 to the writ petition. He further submits that he has applied for grant of licence in appropriate format along with Bank Draft.
Keeping in view the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court without recording any opinion on the merit of the case proposes to dispose of the writ petition with an observation that the licensing authority i.e. Respondent no.5 may take appropriate decision on the representation of the petitioner preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. (Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U