EEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CHHATFISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.)_ , 9?I‘o?5 IN I‘HE MATTER OF \V.P. NO. /2001 Between PETITIONER: - Utkal Road Ways Pvt. Ltd., Registered and Incorporated under Indian Companies Act, 1956 havin “Branch Office at Mandir Hasaud,‘ Raipur. Chhattisgarh. ‘ ' Vs. l. tate of Chhattisgarlh Through the Secretary, Department of Forests, Mantralaya. D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). / 2. Conservator of Forests ( Appellate Authority) Jail Road. Raipur (Chhattisgarh). Sub Divisional Officer (Forests) Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. x / \// 1 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTII ll l ION OF INDIA. la-..“ .l-._w_,-V..‘.»..nH. ,vn‘u). ms “I WWW W W 20m andvshri Sanjuy K. Agmwal, Ieamed Depu‘ry Advoca‘re General for 'rhe§ / S‘I'a‘re / respondent. Hg, What is challenged by The peTi'rioner in this pe'fifion is fhe order of confisoafion of fhe vehicle, a 1'r-uck, seized by ‘rhe Fores‘r Deparfmen‘r and The pe‘ritioner- has also prayed for handing over fhe vehicle fo The company in The same condiTion as T prevailed on 15.3.2001. The order of confisoaTion pf The vehicle was passed by The Third respondenT Sub-Divisional Offi r (ForesT), Mahasamund againsT which The peTiTioner filed on appeal be re The second respondenT ConservaTor of ForesTs, Raipur and The second respondenT has confirmed The order of confiscaTion passed by The Third respondent IT is submiTTed ThaT againsT The order passed by The Third respondent revision lies under cTion 52-3 of The Indian ForesT AcT, 1927. InsTead of filing The vision before The concerned learned Sessions Judge, The peTiTioner hqs approached This CourT. l Evil?W XI»HC-22 /, g aim Em W W W Hrs? snésr mm visa WW? wma’f if 1‘32? Tm a;W m 05.03. 2002 Heard Shri Kishore BhadL ri, learned counsel for The peTiTioner XI—HC—22 W W m m $m W‘§%¢TW Z m m ‘ W W n The circums'rancs, am f fhe onion fha'r +1e pe'l'i'rion has To be disposed o wii'h libey 1’0 ' pe‘rifioner- 1'o file a revision e'riion ‘ againi fhe order ssed by The ond respondt confiring 1‘he rder s pa c en m o o conca‘on passed by ‘I'he T rponden f fish hur est ccordingly, 'the e‘o posed o rh heiy ‘ro the petitioner to file vision petit against the order passed by the second resondent confirming t rder of confiscation paed the thid respondent before the cerned Sessions Judge. If such a :revision petition is filed by the'petitioner, the essions Judge would L S nce to the limitation. . dispose of the same without refe (\ l The petitioner is directed to file revision petition within fifteen days from the date of receipt of :ertified copy of this order. Parties are entitled for certified copy of this order. «x a. l ' 7 z‘ ChiefJusu'ce Sdl- f .— i \‘l/ ‘ Brajesh: 5oma {was eaE I e I o pi 1 f rf rhie pf A ,pi'rhn Is dis f wr pr‘ re in p h o ss by r j c n