WP(C) 907/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA Heard Mr. A.K. Goswami, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. T. Baidya, learne d counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State Counse l. The prayer made in this writ petition is for a direction to the responde nts to allow transportation of marked trees by extending validity of the Certif icate of Origin and by issuing transit pass in favour of the petitioner. In the written instruction dated 25.3.2009 furnished to Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned Sta te Counsel by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nagaon Division, following has been stated :- The proposed joint verification was conducted on 26.3.2008 by the Circl e Officer, Morigaon and Mayong alongwith Sri M. Ahmed, A.C.F. of this Division a nd reports thereof were submitted by the C.O., Morigaon on 15.5.2008 and the C.O . Mayong on 13.5.2008. The details of the joint verification are shown as under :- 1. Morigaon Circle :- 245 Nos. of sal trees, 5 siharu trees, 2 nos of Poma trees and 3 Nos. of Koroi shown to have been physically found in the Dag No. 29, 35, 43, 44, 201, 213, 29 of Patta No.1 of Uttarkhola Mouza. 2. Mayong Circle :- 228 nos. of sal trees were shown to have been physicall y found in the Dag No. 123 and 155 of Patta No.1 and 3 of Gova Mouza. It may be pointed out that the prayer petitions dt. 22.01.09 and 30.01.2009 were directly addressed to the Respondent No.2 for extension of the C.O. granted in favour of the petitioner. As per established procedure, the Respondent No.2 has to obtain the detail information about the action taken on the order passed by t he Respondent No.2 for felling, sectioning, piece passing of logs and uptodate t ransportation of piece passed logs etc. from the Respondent No.4 (R.O. W.R. Dhar amtul) so as to enable the Respondent No.2 to consider further extenstion of the C.O. which is under process. Hence, as alleged by the petitioner that the Respondents acted illegally and arb itrarily is not at all true. There is no doubt that the Respondents are liable to issue Transit Pass against piece passed logs within the validity period the C.O. but after expiry of the va lidity of the same, Respondent No.2 has to obtain detail upto date position of t he operation of the C.O. from the concerning Range Officer (Respondent No.4) who se responsibility in no way be overlooked and who is to ascertain that no pilfe rage is taken place from the adjoining Reserve Forest. Since the felled trees and the sectioned logs are lying in the respective sites, i.e. within the patta-land of the petitioner, the security measures over it lie s on the soldier of the petitioner and not with the Forest Department (Nagaon Di vision) . In view of the above, whatever action is required to be taken by the res pondents, same shall be taken towards granting the prayer of the petitioner as e xpeditiously as possible, preferably within 15.4.2009. The writ petition is disposed of.