Ramayan Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 8458 of 2020 ====================================================== Ramayan Ram Son of Late Dhaneshwar Ram Resident of Village- Satiwadh, P.S.- Sheonagar (Baddi), District- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

2.

The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.

3.

The Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorized Officer, Rohtas Forest Division, Sasaram, District- Rohtas.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr Awanish Nandan Sinha, GP XXI ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 05-02-2021 This case has been taken up for consideration through Video Conferencing.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

The brief submission on behalf of the petitioner is that his vehicle was carrying Kendu leaves in view of the fact that the vehicle had been taken on hire by the Bihar Forestry Development Corporation for transportation of such leaves and without any basis, the same has wrongly been seized. It is submitted that the petitioner has already filed an application for release of the vehicle on 22.08.2020. On the same date, he has also filed an application for compounding. The two applications are Annexures 4 and 7 of the writ petition. Petitioner's counsel further submits that Respondent No 3, till date, has not passed

Patna High Court CWJC No.8458 of 2020(2) dt.05-02-2021 2/2 any order on the said applications and the vehicle is standing in the open sky. Petitioner's only source of livelihood is the vehicle which he was plying for commercial purpose and, as such, inordinate delay in considering the petitioner's applications for release of vehicle and compounding itself visits the petitioner with severe civil consequences. The learned State Counsel submits that if the applications have not been disposed of till date, it is needless to say that the Authority is obliged to consider the petitioner's claim and pass a final order on the applications in accordance with law.

In view of the submissions advanced by the parties, adjudication is not called for in the instant proceedings. This application, therefore, is disposed of.

Respondent No 3 is directed to take a final decision on these two applications expeditiously without any undue delay and pass order in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U