The requirement of a 'no objection' certificate from the landlord is not essential for the renewal of a license for a Saw Mill operator, especially when the Saw Mill has been operating without any complaints for a significant period of time.

JUDGMENT :

RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

1. Leave to correct the description of Respondent No. 2. Correction be carried out forthwith.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the learned Advocates for the respective sides.

3. A short issue is before us for adjudication, in the light of prayer clauses (B) and (C) put forth by the Petitioner/Saw Mill, as under:

“(B) By appropriate writ order or direction set aside the impugned communication dated 01.01.2024 issued by the Respondent No. 2 and for that purpose issue necessary orders.

(C) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present writ petition of this writ petition, grant stay to the effect, operation and implementation to the impugned communication dated 01.01.2024 at EXHIBIT-B and permit the petitioner Saw mill to operate and for that purpose issue necessary orders.”

4. The Petitioner is operating the Saw Mill from 1969. He has received the licence to operate the Mill by complying with all the requisite conditions and his licence has been renewed from time to time. It is undisputed that, since 1969, till today, there is no offence registered against the Saw Mill and there is no complaint against the same. The renewal of the licence has been routinely done by the concerned Authority. In this backdrop, the impugned order dated 01.01.2024, passed by Respondent No. 2/Deputy Conservator of Forest, Jalgaon Forest Department, Jalagon, has shown a reason for not renewing the licence of the Saw Mill, that the Petitioner has some dispute before the Civil Court with the original landlord.

5. We have perused the judgment dated 28.02.2008, delivered by this Court in Writ Petition No. 6158/2007 (Shri Karsandas Gangaram Patel vs. State of Maharashtra and Others). In this matter, the Petitioner had approached the Chief Conservator of Forest by filing an appeal against the non-renewal of the licence by the Competent Authority, which refused renewal purely for the reason that, there was some dispute between the Saw Mill and the landlord. As the Chief Conservator of Forest did not pass any order for two months, the Petitioner approached this Court, preferring Writ Petition No. 2547/2006, which was disposed off, with a direction to the concerned Authority to decide the same. Subsequently, the Appeal was disposed off. Again, the said Petitioner had to approach this Court by filing a Writ Petition.

6. In a lengthy judgment delivered by this Court in Shri Karsandas Gangaram Patel (supra), it was concluded in paragraph Nos. 14 to 16, as under:

“14. It is not in dispute that in the present case Petitioner is running the saw mill from the year 1962 without having any complaint against him regarding breach of any of the conditions of the licence or commission of any act against the conservation of the forest or violation of the activities to be carried out in operating the saw mill. The facts of the present case clearly demonstrate that due to a reason best known to the owner, two years after he purchased the property or acquired the title to it by any other mode, an objection has been raised.

15. As the saw mill is being operated for more than 45 years without there being any complaint, in our considered opinion, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, objections raised by the landlord of the petitioner appear to be motivated. In the facts of the present case, it cannot be said that insistence on the production of no objection certificate after renewal of the licence for last 45 years, was in the interest of the administration. We have already pointed out that none of the provisions of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder make it obligatory for the applicant/ Petitioner to submit no objection certificate for obtaining or renewing the licence. Sub Rule (3) of Rule 88 merely speaks about the enquiry to be conducted by the competent authority for satisfying himself on the question whether or not there would be any objection to granting the sanction or licence applie