IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Writ Appeal No.892 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 11.7.2008 in Writ Petition No.26682 of 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: A.T. Maideen ...Appellant And 1) The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Aranya Bhavan, Hyderabad. 2) The Special Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Environment, Forests, Science & Technology, (For-III) Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3) The Vice-Chairman & Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Forest Development Corporation Ltd., UNI Buildings, Hyderabad. ...Respondents Counsel for the appellant : Sri L. Ravichander for Sri Milind G. Gokhale Counsel for the respondents : Sri C.V. Mohan Reddy, Advocate General assisted by Government Pleader for Forests. The Court passed the following: JUDGMENT: (Per Anil R. Dave, C.J.) 1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 11th July, 2008 passed in Writ Petition No.26682 of 2007, this appeal has been filed by the original petitioner. 2. The appellant – petitioner has been aggrieved for the reason that the respondents have initiated process for sale of Red Sanders Wood by inviting global tenders. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner is dealing in wood and has been aggrieved only for the reason that substantial bulk of Red Sanders Wood is being sold by the respondents though Export Policy of the Union of India has prohibited export of Red Sanders Wood. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant has submitted that because of the Exim Policy of the Union of India, Red Sanders Wood cannot be exported and by inviting global tenders, the respondents, including the State of Andhra Pradesh, would like to get Red Sanders Wood exported against the Export Policy of the Union of India. The learned Advocate has drawn our attention to the relevant portion of the Export Policy declared by the Union of India under Public Notice No.7, dated 5th June, 2007. 4. After hearing the learned Advocates and upon perusal of the record, the learned Single Judge was pleased to reject the petition and being aggrieved by the said order of rejection, this appeal has been filed. 5. Arguments which have been advanced before the learned Single Judge have been repeated by the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant. 6. Upon hearing the learned Advocates and looking to the facts of the case, we ﬁnd that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is just and proper for the reason that by virtue of inviting global tenders no permission with regard to export of Red Sanders Wood in violation of the Export Polity of the Union of India is being granted. 7. At this juncture, only global tenders have been invited so as to see that highest possible price is received by the respondent – Government authorities for the Red Sanders Wood which is to be sold. If at all the buyer of the Red Sanders Wood wants to export the Wood purchased by him, he will have to procure necessary permission from the Union of India for effecting export. Moreover, the one giving the oﬀer has to give his oﬀer by quoting two diﬀerent rates, the ﬁrst rate is to be quoted in case he wants to export Red Sanders Wood in Value Added Product (VAP) form i.e. processed form, according to ITC (HS) classiﬁcation of Export and Import Items i.e., Foreign Trade Policy published by the Government of India or for consumption within the country, and the second rate is to be quoted for export of Red Sanders Wood in round log form (unprocessed form) so as to export the wood provided necessary permission is granted for the export. 8. Thus, it is clear that at this juncture, the respondent authorities only desire to sell the Wood in question and no permission is accorded for export of the wood to the person who is to be successful in the bid. 9. For the afore-stated reasons, in our opinion, the learned Single Judge rightly rejected the petition. We are also in agreement with the reasons given by the learned Single Judge and as we do not ﬁnd any substance in the appeal, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, C.J. 26th August, 2008 VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J. ……REGISTRAR To 1. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Aranya Bhavan, Hyderabad. 2. The Special Chief Secretary, Environment, Forests, Science & Technology (For-III) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3. The Vice-Chairman & Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Forest Development Corporation Ltd., UNI Buildings, Hyderabad. 4. Two copies to the Advocate General, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 5. Two copies to the Govt. Pleader for Forests, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 6. Two CD copies. ARS