P. S. MISHRA, C. J.

( 1 ) ALL these appeals have arisen from a judgment by Neeladri Rao, J. , in which judgment he has stated about the powers of the appellate authority to pass such order as it may think fit in appeal against an order passed under sub-sections 2-A and 2-D of Section 44 in Chapter VII of the A. P. Forest Act, 1967 and the Rules framed thereunder. Learned Single Judge has taken the view that by the use of the word compounding fee the appellate authority has actually not exercised the power under Sec. 59 of the A. P. Forest Act, that sec. 44 (2-E) is of wide amplitude and the appellate authority is empowered not only to confirm or annul the order of confiscation but can either order or issue further directions and even assuming that the order intended to enter into the area covered by Sec. 59 of the A. P. Forest Act, the case or cases before him were not such that he would have exercised his discretion under article 226 of the Constitution and interfere with the directions of the appellate authority. There appears, however, some conflict with the view expressed by the learned single Judge with the view expressed by a Bench of this Court in Divisional forest Officer