IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5017 of 2011 1. RAM NARESH THAKUR SON OF SRI NIRSAN THAKUR, R/O VILLAGE & P.O. MUSTAFAGANJ, P.S. MINAPUR, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR. 2. RAMESHWAR SAHANI SON OF SRI GYAN CHANDRA SAHANI,R/O RASULPUR SALIM, P.O. BHIKHANPUR, P.S. AHIYAPUR, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR. ……..PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH COMMISSIONER- CUM-PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST & ENVIRONMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED UNDER LETTER NO.2675 DATED 30.08.2010 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN-CUM-DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, TIRHUT DIVISION, MUZAFFARPUR. 4. THE SENIOR REGIONAL CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, TIRHUT FOREST DIVISION, MUZAFFARPUR. 5. THE LICENSING AUTHORITY-CUM-DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, TIRHUT FOREST DIVISION, MUZAFFARPUR……………………...RESPONDENTS. For the petitioners : M/s Alok Kumar Agrawal and Gopal Pd. Gupta, Advocates. For the State : Mr. R.K. Singh, J.C. to G.P.-4 ----------- 02/ 18.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State of Bihar and its authorities. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for directing the respondents authorities not to disturb the trade and business of the petitioners and for quashing the Seniority List dated 07.01.2011 issued by respondents selecting the saw mills and also for challenging Orders/Letters bearing nos.178 and 180 dated 22.01.2011 issued against the petitioners directing them to immediately close down their respective saw mills and further to dispose of the stocks of timbers within a period of 30 days failing which the saw mills shall be confiscated and also challenging Circular bearing no.76/2007/2675/F.E. dated 30.08.2010 issued by respondent no.1 laying down the arbitrary criteria for selecting the seniority of the saw mills and also for directing the respondents to prepare fresh list of saw mills after reexamining the seniority as per the recommendation dated 11.06.2008 made by the Central Empowered Committee which was approved by Supreme Court and for other ancillary reliefs. 3. The matter is a contested one and both the parties are raising their respective claims. Similar matter had arisen earlier in C.W.J.C. No.4207 of 2011 and the only difference between that case and the instant case is that in the earlier case the father of the petitioner was the licensee whereas in the instant case the petitioners themselves are the licensees. This fact hardly affects the merit of the case. In the said circumstances, this case is also disposed of in terms of order dated 08.03.2011 passed in C.W.J.C. No.4207 of 2011. 4. The petitioners have got an alternative remedy and hence they should prefer appeals against the impugned decisions taken by the District Level Committee dated 22.01.2011 (Annexure-8 and 9). If such appeals are filed along with a copy of this order as well as an interlocutory application for condoning the delay, the appellate authority shall consider the delay caused due to filing of this writ petition and shall decide the said appeals on merits expeditiously preferably within a period of four months thereafter. If appeals are filed as per the direction given above, the operation of the impugned orders dated 22.01.2011 (Annexure-8 and 9) shall remain stayed till disposal of the concerned appeals. Harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)