IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.862 of 2011 Ram Bilas Thakur Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 2 7.7.2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner submits that prior to coming into force the Bihar Saw Mill (Regulation) Act, 1990, he was registered under Rules 4 to 10 of the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950 and Section 6(1)(d) of the Factories Act, 1948 for operating saw mill as would be evident from Annexure-1. It is stated that in the year 1990 the Legislature enacted Bihar Saw Mill (Regulation) Act, 1990 for establishment and operation of saw mill, saw pit for the protection and conservation of forest produce. Section 5 of the Act provides for filing of an application for licence. The provision stipulates that no person shall operate a Saw Mill or a Saw Pit in existence on the said date, unless he is granted a licence in that behalf under this Act on an application made by such person within a period of thirty days from such date and thereafter the period during which the application is pending for consideration, it shall be deemed as if such person was granted licence under this Act. As the application of the petitioner for grant of licence remained pending, the petitioner moved the Conservator of Forest, Purnea in Appeal No.53/B/01. The learned Appellate Court remanded the matter to the Divisional Forest Officer to decide the application of the petitioner for grant 2 KHAN of licnece in accordance with law and till the adjudication, the petitioner would not operate his saw mill. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner did not operate his saw mill, still the authorities instituted a case against him. Counsel for the State submits that petitioner has not made any specific averments whether he applied for grant of licence within 30 days of time stipulated under Regulation Act, 1990. Heard counsel for the parties. It appears that the Appellate Court had remitted the matter back to the Divisional Forest Officer, Begusarai to dispose of the application of the petitioner. I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The petitioner can file a fresh application annexing the earlier application. The Divisional Forest Officer would dispose of the application within four months thereof. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. (S.P.Singh,J)