IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.21869 of 2003 Between: A.Seethaiah, S/o Narsaiah, R/o Bethole Village, Mahabubabad Mandal, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Conservator of Forests, Warangal Circle, Warangal. 2 The Divisional Forest Officer, South Division Warangal, Warangal. 3 The Sub-Divisional Forest Officer Mahabubabad, Warangal District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order dated 15/2/2003 in R.C. No. 6701/2002/S3 passed by the 2nd respondent rejecting the application submitted by the Petitioner to install a Saw Mill Over the land covered by S.No. 54/B Situated at Bethol village , Mahabubabad Mandal, Warangal District as illegal and contrary to A.P. Saw Mills (Regulation) Rules 1969 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to issue a licence in favour of the Petitioner to run a saw mill under Rule 4 of A.P. Saw Mills Rule 1969 and in accordance with the oreder dated 24/02/2003 in R.C. no. 10596/2002/M12 passed by the 1st respondent and pass such other necessary order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR FORESTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.21869 of 2003 ORDER: The petitioner applied for saw mill licence under Rule 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Saw Mills (Regulation) Rules, 1969 (the Rules, for brevity), duly enclosing the necessary documents and paying the requisite fee. It appears, the Forest Range Oﬃcer, Mahabubabad, also addressed a letter, dated 28.12.2002, recommending grant of licence. After receipt of the report, the third respondent also addressed a letter to the second respondent requesting further action pursuant to the report of Forest Range Oﬃcer. After considering the same, by order, dated 15.02.2003, the second respondent rejected the permission. The petitioner then preferred an appeal before the ﬁrst respondent. By an order dated 24.02.2003 the ﬁrst respondent directed the second respondent to consider the request of the applicant based on the recommendations of the Forest Range Oﬃcer and Sub-Divisional Forest Officer. In spite of the same, second respondent did not pass any order, and therefore, the present writ petition is ﬁled questioning the order dated 15.02.2003 rejecting the licence to establish new saw mill at Bethol Village. This Court after hearing learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests is of considered opinion that the petitioner’s application has been rejected by impugned order for a reason, which is not a ground under the Rules for rejection of application for Saw Mill licence. The impugned order reads as under. A.P.FOREST DEPARTMENT Rc.No.6701/2002/S3 Office of the Divisional Forest Officer, Dt.15-2-2003 Warangal South Division, Warangal. Sub: Application of Sri A.Seethaiah, R/o.M’bad for establishing a new Saw Mill at Bethol (V) Mahabubabad. Ref: 1. His application dt.15-11-2002. * * * Sri A.Seethaiah, R/o.Mahabubabad is hereby informed that his request for establishing a New Saw Mill at Bethol (Village) cannot be considered in view of the Forest protection. Sd/- A.K.Jha, Divisional Forest Officer, Warangal South Division. There cannot be any doubt that licence was rejected on the ground that in view of forest protection problem, it is not advisable to issue fresh licence. Whether the respondent can reject licence on such ground? The answer must be in the negative for the following brief reasons. Rule 3 of the Rules reads as under. 3. (1) No person shall install, erect or operate a Saw Mill for cutting, converting or sawing of timber without obtaining a licence for such installation from the Licensing Authority. (2) No licence for setting up fresh saw mills within a distance of 5 Kms from the boundary of any Forest under the control of the Forest Department whether notiﬁed or not shall be granted, except when it is required for Departmental use. (3) The distance of 5 Kms shall be computed from topo sheets as aerial distance as crow files. The above rule prohibits grant of licence for setting up fresh saw mills within a distance of 5 KMs from the boundary of any Forest under the control of Forest Department whether notiﬁed or not. Except such a ground for refusal no other ground is mentioned in the Rules. This only means, the fact that there are number of saw mills in the area or vague concept of forest protection, cannot be grounds for refusal of licence. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has not brought to the notice of this Court any such provisions of Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967, or any other Rule, which empowers second respondent, who is licensing authority, to reject licence on the ground as disclosed in the impugned order. The impugned order is, therefore, unsustainable. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to second respondent to consider the application of the petitioner in accordance with Andhra Pradesh Saw Mills (Regulation) Rules, 1969, and observations made herein above, and pass appropriate orders within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The second respondent shall pay costs of this writ petition to petitioner. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 04.11.2008 vs To 1 The Conservator of Forests, Warangal Circle, Warangal. 2 The Divisional Forest Officer, South Division Warangal, Warangal. 3 The Sub-Divisional Forest Officer Mahabubabad, Warangal District. 4 2CCs to G.P for Forests, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 5 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ANURADHA}