IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3477 of 2004 Surya Bansh Dubey, Resident of village- Mangraulia, P.O. Shakhra, P.S. Rajpur,District- Rohtas …………………Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through the Secretary, Forest & Environment Department, Old Secretariat, Patna, Bihar. 2. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest Patna, Bihar. 3. The Chief Conservator of Forest Patna, Bihar. 4. The Regional Conservator of Forest Patna, Bihar. 5. The Conservator of Forest Patna, Bihar. 6. D.F.O. Sasaram Rohtas, Bihar. 7. Regional Chief Forest Conservator India Goovernment, East Regional Office Kharbel Nagar, Bhuwaneshwar Orissa)………..Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate Mr. B.S. Mishra,Advocate. Mr. C.B. Upadhaya, Advocate.. For the State: Mr. Satish Kumar Sinha, A.C. to S.C. No.1. 3 18.03.2011 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Consistorian of India by filing the present writ petition with a prayer for quashing an order contained in letter dated 22.02.1999 (Annexure 5) issued under the signature of Deputy Advisor/Deputy Consultant, Environment, Department of Forest and Environment, Government of Bihar, whereby it was communicated to the respondent no. 1 that the State Government has refused to recommend to the Central Government for allotment of lands in question in favour of the petitioner for non-forestry use under the provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (in short Act). 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite recommendation dated 5th September, 1994 (Annexure-1) by the Divisional Forest Officer, Sasaram, recommendation dated 030.8.1995 (Annexure-2) by the Conservator of Forest, Patna as also despite recommendation dated 16.09.1996 (Annexure 3) by the Nodal Officer for allotment of forest lands in favour of the petitioner, detailed in those letters, for non-forestry use 2 under the provisions of the Act , the State Government has mechanically passed the impugned order dated 22.02.1999 (Annexure-5) and by a cryptic and non-speaking order, the State Governemnt has refused to recommend the claim of the petitioner to the Central Government for allotment of forest lands in question in his favour for non-forestry use i.e. for mining/ quarrying purposes. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent State and its officers were obliged to act in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Forest (Conservation) Rules, 1981, framed under the provisions of the Act 1980. He has further submitted that for non-recommending the claim of the petitioner, State Government was obliged to disclose the reasons in the impugned order, but that is completely lacking. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has supported the impugned order and has placed reliance on the averments made in the counter affidavit. According to him since the State Government did not find it a fit case for recommendation for allotment of forest lands in favour of the petitioner for mining purposes, his claim was not forwarded to the Central Government 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and on perusal of the impugned order dated 22.02.1999 (Annexure- 5), I find that the impugned order is non-speaking order, and, the reasons have not at all been disclosed therein as to why the State Government has refused to recommend the claim of the petitioner for allotment of forest lands for its non-forestry use i.e. for mining purposes and, therefore, on that ground alone impugned order as contained in Annexure-5 is not sustainable in the eye of law. 3 7. For the reasons recorded above, the impugned order dated 22.2.1999 (Annexure-5) is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted to the State Government for fresh decision in accordance with law. The petitioner is hereby directed to appear before the Secretary, Department of Forest and Environment, Government of Bihar, Patna within a period of six weeks from today, with a detailed representation regarding his claim and with a certified copy of the present order . If the petitioner appears within the time prescribed by this court along with a representation and a copy of this order, then the Secretary of the department shall be obliged to decide his claim by a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of his appearance and filing of his representation, and also after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned. 8. It is also made clear that if the petitioner does not appear within the time prescribed with a representation and a certified copy of the present order before the Secretary, Department of Forest and Environment, Government of Bihar, Patna then it shall be construed that the present writ petition has been finally rejected by this Court. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ application stands allowed. Rahman ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)