IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2009 / 31ST BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 15798 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MR.MUHAMMED ASHRAF S/O.MAMMU HAJI, AGED 37 YEARS PROPRIETOR, KUTTIPPURAVAN SAWMILL, PEECHAMKODE, KELLOOR, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KRISHNA PRASAD. S RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT WILDLIFE DIVISION, THOLPETTY RANGE, BEGUR, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 2. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICERM MANANTHAVADY RANGE ,MANANTHAVADY WAYANAD. 3. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER (FLYING SQUAD) DEPARTMENT OF FOREST & WILD LIFE, KANNUR. 4. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, NORTH WAYANAD, DEPARTMENT OF FORESTS & WILD LIFE WAYANAD. 5. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (VIGILANCE) FOREST HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHAKKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FORESTS & WILDLIFE, SECRETARAIT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.M.PAULOSE FOR R1 TO 6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.15798/09 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF NOC DT 18.10.08. P2 COPY OF MAHASSAR FIRST REPORT DT 6.8.06. P3 COPY OF MAHASSAR FIRST REPORT DT 9.8.06. P4 COPY OF STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER DT 25.8.06. P5 COPY OF STATEMENT DT 25.8.06 P6 COPY OF STATEMENT DT 26.8.06 P7 COPY OF STATEMENT DT 26.8.06 P8 COPY OF NOTICE DT 1.6.09. P9 COPY OF PRELIMINARY OBJECTION FILED BEFORE R2 DT 4.6.09. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R2(A) COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN OR.5/06 R2(B) COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN OR.6/06 R2(C) COPY OF LETTER DT 26.2.09 R2(D) COPY OF CIRCULAR DT 24.6.99 R2(E) COPY OF APPLICATION DT 6.10.08. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ```````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 15798 of 2009 T ````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T Heard Sri.S.Krishna Prasad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.M.Paulose, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is the proprietor of a saw mill. The No Objection Certificate issued to him by the Forest Department was renewed on 18.10.2008 for a period of five years as can be seen from Ext.P1 certificate. It appears that based on an occurrence report filed by the first respondent in the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mananthavady, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner to cancel the No Objection Certificate issued to him. It is stated that teakwood illegally cut and removed from the reserve forest was sawn in the petitioner's saw mill and that he did not take steps to ensure that the timber sawn in his saw mill was legally obtained. Ext.P8 show cause notice was thereupon issued by the Forest Range Officer, Mananthavady, informing the petitioner that the Divisional Forest Officer, North Wayanad has directed him to initiate steps to cancel the WPC.15798/09 : 2 : NOC. The petitioner was also called upon to stop the sawmill within seven days. He was also informed that if he has any objection to the proposal in Ext.P8, it will be open to him to file a representation before the Forest Range Officer. Ext.P8 is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. The second respondent has filed a counter affidavit justifying the action taken by him. In my opinion, as Ext.P8 is only a show cause notice, it is for the petitioner to show cause why the proposal thereon should not be implemented. Though the petitioner has filed Ext.P9 representation, it is only a cryptic one and does not deal with the various contentions set out in this writ petition. In my opinion, the petitioner ought to have submitted a detailed representation highlighting the grounds raised in this writ petition instead of rushing to this Court. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction that in the event of the petitioner filing a detailed representation in reply to Ext.P8 show cause notice before the second respondent, the second respondent shall consider the same and take a decision thereon and communicate the same to the petitioner. The petitioner shall also be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard in person. Final orders in the matter shall be passed within three months from today. WPC.15798/09 : 3 : Till such time, the interim order passed by this Court on 10.06.2009 and extended on 7.8.2009 shall continue to operate. Thereafter, the rights of parties will be governed by the order passed by the Forest Range Officer subject to the right of the petitioner to challenge the same, if he is aggrieved thereby, in other appropriate proceedings. His contentions on the merits are kept open. Sd/- (P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. to Judge