IMPORTANT POINT
License renewal for a saw mill requires compliance with document requirements under the A.P. Wood Based Industries Rules, irrespective of prior operation.

JUDGMENT :

R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.

1. Heard Smt. Almas Begum Mohammed, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, learned G.P. for Forests appearing for respondents 1 to 5 and Sri N. Subba Rao, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri M. Devi Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent.

2. These writ appeals are being disposed of by way of a common order, as they are arose out of a common order passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P. Nos. 19256 and 2339 of 2023. The parties to the present litigation are being referred to as they are arrayed in W.A. No. 296 of 2024.

3. The 5th respondent had set up and was running a saw mill in an extent of Acs.0.97 cents in R.S. No. 4/2 of Kalavalapalli Village, Chagallu Mandal, West Godavari District, from the year 2013 onwards. The appellant herein had filed O.S. No. 275 of 2017 before the Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, against the 5th respondent for evicting the 5th respondent from the said property and for payment of rental arrears. It is the case of the appellant that he had purchased the aforesaid land from the proprietor of the 5th respondent under a registered deed of sale dated 08.10.2012. It was the case of the appellant that the 5th respondent having obtained the property on oral lease, was seeking to knock away the property by claiming to be the owner and as such required to be evicted from the land. This suit is still pending before the trial Court.

4. The appellant also moved O.S. No. 30 of 2018 before the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nidadavole, seeking permanent injunction restraining the 5th respondent from interfering with the property of the appellant. This suit came to be dismissed on 09.11.2021. While the above litigations were pending, the District Forest Officer, Eluru Forest Division, had renewed the licence given to the 5th respondent, for running a saw mill.

5. This renewal of licence was challenged, by the appellant, by way of W.P. No. 2380 of 2022. This writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 14.10.2022. Subsequently, the appellant again moved W.P. No. 2339 of 2023 challenging the inaction of the District Forest Officer in suspending the licence granted to the 5th respondent. This Court passed an interim direction on 01.02.2023 directing the District Forest Officer to consider the representation of the appellant dated 03.01.2023 and pass a speaking order on the question whether the licence given to the 5th respondent has to be suspended or not.

6. The Forest Range Officer, in compliance of the above order, conducted an enquiry on 07.02.2023 and submitted a report stating that the 5th respondent had not produced relevant documents relating to the property. On this basis, the District Forest Officer refused to renew the licence issued in favour of the 5th respondent. Aggrieved by this order, the 5th respondent moved an appeal before the Chief Forest Officer, Rajamahendravaram Circle. This appeal was dismissed on 06.07.2023. Aggrieved by the said order, the 5th respondent moved W.P. No. 19256 of 2023.

7. A learned Single Judge of this Court, after considering the submissions made in both the cases, was pleased to allow W.P. No. 19256 of 2023 setting aside the order of the Chief Forest Officer, dated 06.07.2023 with a further direction to the official respondents to renew the licence of the 5th respondent as and when an application is filed for such purpose. This order was passed on the ground that the 5th respondent had been running a saw mill in accordance with the Rules and there was no ground to the authority to refuse the renewal of licence of the existing saw mill.

8. Aggrieved by the order allowing W.P. No. 19256 of 2023 and dismissing W.P. No. 2339 of 2023, the appellant herein moved these two appeals.

9. Smt. Almas Begum Mohammed, learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that there can be no renewal of licence given to the 5th respondent in as much as he does not have any document of title or deed of lease, which is one of the mandatory d