’ éalmLq£au2wq 2& vrEiIaPETfa§a “9 ; Jehrul Hass, an aged about 6O year. s sen of i Ohé Occupafon w Business es Ctra , r/o AmAapu. (Ca J ate o Chhattisaar chmugh SecaryIDepatmm o£ Forest D.K.s.Bha{V—m Man-tralay Rawyur Conservator of Forssta arguja $ircle,Ambikar Divi ' . F01" ,, C‘c, So ‘a V Man. Ambk (a £1Ws m TITTON UN ‘ ' ‘ ¢§l~¢A * I x ’ DmNHwiUm P ‘ vgamm LxOnEB IEION AND F Vi O 9 Dl‘J LgJa 1 JUD .AI‘Jxr, AT BEIJI£Sk>UR gc’IHA Hhj IIi f “orx: ovlc 0r bix 1§V¢$t f ‘h ratr t , a i S pu s 7 (mm :.sz 7figr u h aarg’ug an é'd lanu“ tu E DLR AlxlICL S 2g Zg27 O—‘ “”7 £0JST JTEGN OF ”DSUANvlJ 0” A WRI' J: JIM *‘u§'‘U“" OJ‘ CFVI‘TOv ”WI? On \ 0 CT IGN Oi? DIR ‘"O?Vs$a R OR OtiDxiR $ , _ D .L XLHC—22 Wé‘QT EH$ ‘w:.P:..Mu.:,zz,zsu%i 209 my 31a ma, wm WWE? mm?” $§ie§ anémm Wlq.a a gi armm mw mmaféa 1 1439-23321 Shri MaBindra Shm‘vastaxéa, C Shri Rambjr Singh. Govt. Adv Hsad . Aggi‘iéved with the hction 0‘7 Seetiorx 12 of m6 MP. Kashtha ( ounsel for the petitioner. for 1115 State. It is; no Sinco beefl decided on 31—8—2001 aggriovsd with the Fart Ejection of ¥ q .1 2 u theta: (Viniyamao) Adhiniyam, 1984 {in Short the Act} the petitionot hat}, milder Sub—section {3} of the Act, preferred a1} appeai befgre the Con$ervator of Foreet, Ambikapur. Since the appeal was lot taken up for coneideratioxl for a long time; the petitioner appr aeheci the MP. High Court b’v way of VIP. No.271 1 f 1993. The semi: Wiit pe‘titiorl, on the formation of the State of Chhattisgarh, Was tronsfeired to this Com and the Soue was disposed of on 09—08—20L 1 13V directjiig the Conseita’or matter on merits; and paes disputed that the appeal hat: aiid hast beeo partly allowed. the appeal, the petitioner hae 1 LL1€ of Fm‘ést i0 examine {hé entim 116C6Ssa1y orders themoll. I approachod fhi$ Court. i i petitioner is entitled to approach cohfmca‘fion in terms o The contet’m'on of the leame. counsel for the. petitioner is that in View of the orders paesed '1 the earlier writ petition, the reepomlent No.2 — Conservator of FO *est, Ambikapur was obh‘ged to decide ail the issues on meiits antlilie having failed to do so, me dis Court by waV of this writ yetition. This contention cannot be ocepted. This Court had- not, in the earlier writ petition, adjudioiated upon the merits of the XLHCQZ mm mm $11 mmmm $63? w 1" l diSyu‘ce That petition wa$ dispo‘ clirecting ’thS Appellata Authority ‘: own man't. It cannot b6 disputed c‘iisposed of, Th€ mam fact d€cided agajiist thE petitionsr, or t} petitio3€r has not been grafxted dos not beam disposed 0f on men'ts, a. N ‘?' Ma: 2223 PI {4:1 2% mg r mafm—rw W xi fgvfr 1W 35’ é? Aaq 3.1 3.3,; Charly appealable undar sub-sectio provision is not c'iisputed. after, the Court decliuos to emeitajn this writ petition. Accord gly, the petition is dismissed) giving Eiseiiy to the petitioner to pproach the Appeiiate Fonim under subsection (4) of the Section 1‘2 of the Act, if so advised. Roshan ;ed of, as o‘bgerved above, by Lo disposs of the appeal on its that tho aypoal has Sines boing mat a‘omo of Tho isssu§s have boon In tho, above View of the a Sd/— P.C-Naik Judge r lat the fail reliaf claimed by tho 3 not mean that the appeal has s oirectecl bv this Court. That ’ aoalt sub—sectioo (4) of the Section 12 of the Act Clearly lays down {hat any person aggrieved by an order passed under sub—section (8) of theAct may prefer so appeal to the District Court having jurisdiction. over the area in which: the property has been seized, Thus theorder passed by the resyondent No2 — Consewator of Forest, Ambikapur in exercise of oower under sub—section {3) is (4) of the Act. This statutoiy :