Umesh Sharma @ Umesh Prasad Sharma v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10041 of 2023 ====================================================== Umesh Sharma @ Umesh Prasad Sharma Son of Kamleshwari Prasad Sharma Resident of Village- Mangar Deru, P.S.- Dhoraiya, District, District- Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Environment and Forest Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest- cum- Chairman, of State Level Committee for Wood- based Industries, Bihar, Patna. 3.
The Lecensing Officer-cum- Divisional Forest Officer, Banka Forest Division, Banka.
4.
The Forester, Dhoraiya, P.S.- Dhoraiya, District- Banka. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vinay Mistry, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Raghwanand (GA-11) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-09-2024 Heard the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief/s:- "i) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the seizure list dated 22.05.2023 (Annexure-2) effected by the Forester, Dhoraiya, Banka whereby saw mill alongwith wood have been seized under Section 8 of the (Bihar Saw Mills Regulation) Act, 1990 as the Forester is not authorized to make inspection, search and
Patna High Court CWJC No.10041 of 2023(3) dt.12-09-2024 2/2 seizure of saw mill under section-8 of the (Bihar Saw Mills Regulation) Act, 1990.
ii) For issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents authorities to release the seized materials in favour of the petitioner so that the petitioner could run the business for their livelihood in the facts and circumstances of the case."
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the State submits that the saw mill was being run without valid license and in that background, the decision was made.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it will be suffice if sympathetic consideration is given to his plea and further submits that he will be preferring representation before an appropriate authority.
5. Granting said liberty and without commenting on the merit of the case, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U