IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6394 of 2011 1. DARUKA TIMBERS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR BIJAY KUMAR DARUKA SON OF LATE SHYAM SUNDER DARUKA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BANHARA P.O.+ P.S.- AMARPUR, DISTRICT-BANK. 2. DNESH PRASAD SHARMA @ DINESH SHARMA, SON OF LATE CHAMMAN PRASAD SHARMA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE + P.O.+ P.S. SHAMBHUGANJ, DISTRICT-BANKA. 3. JHINGAL SHARMA SON OF LATE MISHRI SHARMA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BANHARA P.O.+ P.S. –AMARPUR, DISTRICT-BANKA. ….. PETITIONERS. VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER BHAGA,PUR-CUM- THE CHAIRMAN OF SAW MILL SELECTION COMMITTEE, BHAGALPUR. 4. THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BHAGALPUR-CUM- MEMBER SAW MILL SELECTION COMMITTEE, BHAGALPUR. 5. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, BANKA-CUM- THE MEMBER SECRETARY, SAW MILL SELECTION COMMITTEE, BHAGALPUR. 6. THE RANGER OFFICER, BANKA RANGE, BANKA. 7. THE FORESTER, BANKA CIRCLE, BANKA. ……… RESPODENTS. For the petitioners : M/s. Aditya Prakash Sahay, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Ashok Kumar Verma, A.C. to SC – 8. -------- WITH CWJC No.7031 of 2011 1. M/S SHARMA TIMBER, BEHIND HOTEL, KADAM KUAN, P.S. KADAM KUAN, DISTRICT-PATNA, A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR KANHAI LAL SHARMA SON OF LATE JHAGRU LAL SHARMA, RESIDENT OF BEHIND APASARA HOTEL, KADAM KUAN, P.S. KADAM KUAN, DISTRICT-PATNA. 2. M/S UNITED TIMER, NEW BYE PASS ROAD, KHEMNI CHAK, P.S. RAMKRISHNA NAGAR, DISTRICT-PATNA, A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR DEO SHARAN SHARMA SON OF LATE BAIJU MISTRI, RESIDENT OF NALA ROAD, P.S. KADAM KUAN, DISTRICT-PATNA. 3. M/S SHYAM NANDAN MISTRI SAW MILLS, ATHMAL GOLA P.S. ATHMAL GOLA, DISTRICT-PATNA, A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SHYAM NANDAN MISTRI - 2 - SON OF SRI BHAGERU MISTRI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BAHADURPUR, P.S. ATHMAL GOLA, DISTRICT-PATNA. 4. M/S DILIP KUMAR TIMER, TAREGNA GOLA ROAD, MASURHI, P.S. MASAURI, DISTRICT-PATNA, A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SUKHDEO MISTRI SON OF SRI TOOSAN MISTRI, RESIDENT OF TAREGNA GOLA ROAD, MASAURHI, P.S. MASURHI, DISTRICT-PATNA. 5. M/S BINOD MISTRI SAW MILLS, MUBARAKPUR, P.S. KURTHA, DISTRICT-ARWAL, A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR BINOD MISTRI SON OF LATE RAMPATI MISTRI, RESIDENT OF MUBARAKPUR, P.S. KURTHA, DISTRICT-ARWAL. 6. M/S MUNGESHWAR MISTRI SAW MILL, KHAIRADIH, P.S. KINJAR, DISTRICT-ARWAL, A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR MUNGESHWAR MISTRI SON OF LATE CHANDRADEO MISTRI, RESIDENT OF KHAIRADIH, P.S. KINJAR, DISTRICT-ARWAL. ….. PETITIONERS. VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENVIRONMENT & FOREST DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BIHAR, 4TH FLOOR, TECHNOLOGY BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 3. THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, PATNA CIRCLE, PATNA, NEHRU NAGAR, PATNA. 4. THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, GAYA CIRCLE, GAYA, KARIMGANJ, GAYA. 5. THE LICENSING OFFICER CUM-DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, PATNA FOREST DIVISION, PATNA, NEHRU NAGAR, PATNA. 6. THE LICENSING OFFICER-CUM- DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, AURANGABAD FOREST DIVISION, AURANGABAD. ….. RESPONDENTS. ------- For the petitioners : M/s. Mrigank Mauli & Vinay Mistry, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. Maruth Nath Roy, A.C. to SC – 25 -------- WITH CWJC No.7644 of 2011 1. M/S KUMAR INDUSTRIES, ETWARPUR, P.S. PARSA BAZAR, DISTRICT-PATNA, A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM THROUGH ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER BITESHWAR PRASAD SON OF LATE RAMA SHANKAR PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-RAGHOPUR, P.S. BIHTA, DISTRICT-PATNA. 2. BHIKAHARI MISTRI SON OF LATE GANGU MISTRI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-KUTRI TOLA-TULLAPUR, P.S.WARSALIGANJ, DISTRICT-NAWADAH. - 3 - 3. RAMDEO MISTRI SON OF LATE KALI MISTRI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-DARIYAPUR, P.S. WARSALIGANJ, DISTRICT- NAWADAH. 4. RAMDHIN MISTRI SON OF LATE BANSI MISTRI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BALLUPUR, P.S. WARSALIGANJ, DISTRICT- NAWADAH. ….. PETITIONERS. VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENVIRONMENT & FOREST DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, BIHAR, 4TH FLOOR, TECHNOLOGY BHAWAN, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA. 3. THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-CHAIRMAN, SELECTION COMMITTEE OF SAW MILLS, PATNA DIVISION, PATNA. 4. THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-CHAIRMAN, SELECTION COMMITTEE OF SAW MILLS, MAGADH DIVISION, GAYA. 5. THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, PATNA CIRCLE, PATNA, NEHRU NAGAR, PATNA. 6. THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, GAYA CIRCLE, GAYA, KARIMGANJ, GAYA. 5. THE LICENSING OFFICER CUM-DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, PATNA FOREST DIVISION, PATNA, NEHRU NAGAR, PATNA. 6. THE LICENSING OFFICER-CUM- DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, NAWADAH FOREST DIVISION, NAWADAH. ----------- For the petitioners : M/s. Mrigank Mauli & Vinay Mistry, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. Ritesh Kumar, A.C. to A.A.G – III -------- 02/ 03.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State of Bihar and its authorities. 2. All these writ petitions have been filed by the respective petitioners challenging the notification issued by the Department of Environment and Forest, Government of Bihar, by which criterions have been laid down to prepare seniority lists of saw mills as well as veneer mills, which, according to the petitioners, is in complete violation of the recommendations and orders of the Central Empowered Committee as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the - 4 - same is also violative of the constitutional mandate as guaranteed under Articles 14 and 301 of the Constitution of India and also challenging the seniority lists prepared by the respective Sawmill Selection Committees of the districts, which were prepared pursuant to the aforesaid notification dated 30.08.2010 and also challenging the notices issued by the concerned Licensing Officers-cum-the Divisional Officers, by which the petitioners were directed to close down their respective saw-mills as they were not included in the final seniority list. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this matter is exactly the same as was involved in the four writ cases bearing C.W.J.C. No. 5200 of 2011 and others decided by this Court on 05.04.2011 and hence a similar order is required to be passed in the instant cases also. 4. 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 cases the petitioners themselves are the licensees. This fact hardly affects the merit of the case. In the said circumstances, these cases are also disposed of in terms of order dated 08.03.2011 passed in C.W.J.C. No.4207 of 2011. 5. The petitioners have got an alternative remedy and hence they should prefer appeals if they want to challenge the impugned decisions taken by the District Level Committees as has - 5 - been provided in law. If such appeals are filed along with a copy of this order as well as interlocutory applications for condoning the delay, the appellate authority shall consider the delay caused due to filing of these writ petitions and shall decide the said appeals on merits expeditiously preferably within a period of four months thereafter keeping in view the order of the Apex Court dated 30.01.2009 passed in WP(C) No. 460 of 2004 and other analogous cases as well as the decision dated 04.09.2009 passed in WP(C) No. 202 of 1995 and the steps taken by the Government in the light of the said decisions. If such appeals are filed as per the direction given above, the operation of the orders impugned in these writ petitions shall remain stayed till disposal of the concerned appeals. Sunil (S. N. Hussain, J.)