IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 25836 of 2002 Between: A.Madhava Rao, S/o.Narasimha Rao R/o.Magdumpur, Chennaraopet Mandal, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Divisional Forest Officer, Flying Squad Division, Warangal , Warangal District. 2 The Conservator of Forest, Warangal Circle, Warangal District. 3 The Executive Engineer, S.C.Corporation, Warangal, Warangal District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Order dated: 31-10-2001 issued by the 1st Respondent in Offence File No: 51/ESP/2001-2001 and also the Order dated : 03-06-2002 made in Proceedings No: Rc.No.11823/B/2001/M12 passed by the 2nd Respondent as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of A.P. Forest Act and rules made there under. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. A.PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents : The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.25836 OF 2002 ORDER : The petitioner herein who was awarded the work for construction of Kitchen-cum-Dining Hall Building attached to Social Welfare Hostel at Narsampet, Warangal District by the 3rd respondent Corporation. Alleging that while executing the said work, the petitioner had used Teak timber having obtained the same through illegal sources, which constituted a forest offence, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and ultimately by order dated 31.10.2001 passed by the 1st respondent under The Andhra Pradesh Forest Offences (Compounding and Prosecution) Rules, 1969, the offence was compounded for a sum of Rs.94,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, though the petitioner preferred an Appeal before the 2nd respondent – Conservator of Forests, Warangal, the same was dismissed by order dated 3.6.2002. Hence, the present writ petition seeking a declaration that the orders dated 31.10.2001 and 3.6.2002 passed by the respondents 1 and 2 respectively are arbitrary and illegal. Heard both sides. Though various grounds are raised by the petitioner assailing the impugned orders on merits, I am not inclined to express any opinion on merits since it is clear from the order of the 2nd respondent that none of the grounds raised by the petitioner in the Memorandum of Grounds filed along with his Appeal were considered by the 2nd respondent. Rule 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Offences (Compounding and Prosecution) Rules, 1969 provided a remedy of Appeal and in case any such appeal is provided, the appellate authority is bound to call for and examine the record so as to satisfy itself as to the legality, propriety and regularity of order under Appeal and pass appropriate orders. Needless to mention that the conclusions arrived at by the appellate authority shall be supported by the reasons and failure to do so amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. In the case on hand, it is apparent that while dismissing the Appeal the 2nd respondent failed to assign any reasons. Absence of reasons being one of the grounds for judicial review, the impugned order is liable to be set aside on that ground alone. Accordingly, the order of the 2nd respondent dated 3.6.2002 is hereby set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to reconsider the Appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of the 1st respondent dated 31.10.2001 and pass appropriate orders afresh in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 19.03.2009 gbs