THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11084 of 2000 Date: 30.01.2008 Between: Boggavarapu Hazarathaiah … Petitioner AND The Govt., of A.P., rep., by its Secretary, Environment, Forests, Science & Technology Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : None Counsel for the respondents : None THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION. No.11084 of 2000 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in granting licence to the petitioner to run the sawmill and in communicating the result of the application filed by him as per G.O.Ms.No.99 dated 17.07.1998, as illegal and unjust. At the hearing, neither the learned counsel for the petitioner nor the learned Government Pleader for Forest appeared. I have perused the record. The grievance of the petitioner as could be seen from the averments contained in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is that though he submitted application dated 21.10.1999 to respondent Nos.2 and 3 for grant of licence to run a sawmill, they neither granted a fresh licence nor renewed the earlier licence. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.3 it is inter alia averred that the petitioner failed to apply for grant of licence within the prescribed time limit; that he submitted his application on 25.10.1999 i.e., one year and one month after the lapse of his sawmill license, and that he failed to enclose the necessary documents such as location sketch, agreement copy, copy of factory licence, evidence of ownership of the sawmill and copy of sales tax registration as stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.99 dated 17.07.1998. It is also averred that the petitioner failed to furnish other required documents such as “No Objection Certificate” from his partner i.e., Sri Chavala Nammalyar Chetty in whose favour licence was earlier granted and subsequently renewed and that notice dated 21.11.1999 was issued followed by a reminder on 21.12.1999 to produce those documents. It is also mentioned that to legal notice dated 30.04.2000 got issued by the petitioner, reply dated 10.05.2000 was issued, calling upon him to immediately comply with the requirements of G.O.Ms.No.99 dated 17.07.1998 and that despite the same he failed to produce the said necessary documents on account of which his application could not be processed and finalized. No reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioner controverting the abovementioned averments. As the petitioner failed to comply with the requirements for consideration of his application for grant of fresh sawmill licence, as pointed out by the respondents, it cannot be said that the action of the respondents in not disposing of his application suffers from any illegality warranting interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is therefore dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.14107 of 2000 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed. C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 30.01.2008 ES