1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 269 OF 2003 1 Sahebrao s/o Dattarao Deshmukh, age 33 years,occ. Agril., r/o Irapur, Taluka Hadgaon, District Nanded ...Petitioner VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra, through the Collector, Nanded, 2 The Tahsildar, Hadgaon, Taluka Hadgaon, District Nanded, 3 Gopalrao s/o Rangrao Deshmukh, age 50 years, occ. Agril., Police Patil Irapur, Taluka Hadgaon, District Nanded, 4 Rangrao s/o Kisanrao Deshmukh, age 70 years, occ. Agril., r/o Irapur, Taluka Hadgaon, District Nanded. ...Respondents ..... Shri H.A.Joshi, advocate holding for Shri D.A. Naik and A.R.Shinde, advocates for the petitioner Shri K.J.Ghute Patil, APP for respondent nos. 1 and 2 Shri S.V.Warad, advocate for respondent nos. 3 and 4 ..... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, JJ. DATED : 09.03.2010 2 ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per P.V.Hardas, J.) 1 This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, by which the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ directing respondent no.2 to register an offence against respondent nos. 3 and 4 for violating the provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue (Cutting and Supply of Woods) Rules, 1970 and under relevant law. The petitioner also prays for holding respondent no.2 responsible for not taking appropriate action against respondent nos. 3 and 4. 2 Such of the facts, as are necessary for decision of this petition, may briefly be stated thus. According to the petitioner, respondent nos. 3 and 4 had cut about 5 Babul trees standing on Gairan land (grazing land) from Gat No. 92 at village Irapur. On the same day i.e. 21.1.2002, the petitioner filed his complaint before the Tahsildar, Hadgaon. Accordingly, the spot panchanama was executed on the next day and the petitioner claims that respondent nos. 3 and 4 had admitted committing the said act of cutting of the trees. The petitioner made various representations to the Tahsildar, Hadgaon, but no action was taken, and in fact, only fine of Rs.100/- was imposed. 3 3 On notice of this petition being issued to the respondents, the respondents have filed their affidavit in reply. In the affidavit in reply, it is stated that as per the provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue (Cutting and Supply of Woods) Rules, 1970, the cut trees were put to auction and the amount double the auction amount has been recovered from respondent nos. 3 and 4 as penalty, which has been deposited by respondent nos. 3 and 4 in the treasury. It is also stated that in addition thereto, respondent no.3 being the Police Patil has been fined Rs.100/- by the Tahsildar. It is also submitted that an appeal has been filed against the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer before the Divisional Commissioner and at the time of filing of the affidavit, the said appeal was pending. The petitioner has obviously not disclosed in the petition that respondent nos. 3 and 4 were fined under the relevant provisions and were ordered to pay fine twice the auction amount. 4 Our attention has been invited to Rule 2 (3) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue (Regulation of Cutting and Supply of Wood, etc.) Rules, 1970. The afore said Rule contemplates that any person committing a breach of this rule shall be liable to a fine not exceeding two times the value of the wood cut or lopped. 5 As per the provisions of law, respondent nos. 3 and 4 4 have been penalised. Learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to show to us any provision relating to the prosecution of the respondents before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class. 6 In the light of the fact that respondent nos. 3 and 4 have been penalised for the act of cutting the trees in the Gairan land without obtaining permission, according to us, no interference is called for in this petition. This petition, thus being sans merit, is dismissed with no order as to costs. Rule stands discharged. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) dbm/crwp269.03