THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 23457 of 2010 Oral order: The drilling machines of the petitioner were seized by the respondents in connection with a forest offence initiated in pursuance of the proceedings dated 09.06.2010. A case in connection with the offence in question is subject matter of proceedings before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Asifabad. The petitioner submitted application to respondent No.4, namely the Divisional Forest Officer, Bellampally, requesting him to release the drilling machines, but respondent No.4, by reason of the impugned order dated 09.08.2010, refused to release the drilling machines on the ground that a case in connection with the forest offence is pending on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Hyderabad, and therefore, he is not inclined to take any decision in the matter. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.4 being a quasi judicial authority and power having been vested in him to grant interim custody of the property, which is subject matter of crimes pending, he has to exercise his discretion by applying his mind to the facts of the case and pass orders, and as such, respondent No.4 committed a grave error in not exercising his powers and passing the impugned orders, refusing to grant interim custody of the property sought by him. In spite of adjourning the matter two times, the learned Government Pleader for Forests is unable to get any instructions. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Forests. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that power is conferred on respondent No.4 to take independent decision for release of the property pending enquiry/trial of cases by the competent court, and since it is the case of the petitioner, as is evident from the impugned order, respondent No.4 refused to exercise the discretion vested in him on the ground that a crime is pending on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, the impugned order passed by him cannot be sustained. Hence, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded to respondent No.4 for re-considering the matter afresh and for passing appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from today. No costs. ________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Dated: 01st October, 2010 KSR