Tapen Sen, J.

1. In this Writ Application the Petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 12.7.2001 passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Deoghar (Respondent No. 3) in Confiscation Case No, 27 of 2000 by which the application for grant of licence was refused and the Petitioner was. directed to displace his Saw Mill within fifteen days from the order and deposit those 21 logs (which had been confiscated during the year 1995) with the Range Officer of Forest, Deoghar soil Conservation Range at Kalyanpur Range Campus. By the same order the other 63 pieces of logs and 25 pieces of Sawn Timber were released with a direction upon the Petitioner to dispose off the same within fifteen days from the order.

2. The Petitioner has also made a prayer for a direction upon the Respondents to grant him the necessary licence treating him to be licencee with effect from 1995 (from the date the Petitioner had deposited the requisite fee) and further, to renew the licence in terms of the Bihar Saw Mill Regulation Act, 1990.

3. The Petitioner filed an application for grant of licence in the year 1995 for operation of a Saw Mill in terms of the said Act, Subsequently, on or about 29.5.1995, twenty one pieces of logs were seized and a confiscation proceeding was initiated being Confiscation Case No. 3 of 1995 whereafter, the order of confiscation was passed on 18.10.1995. Being aggrieved, the Petitioner filed an appeal before the Conservator of Forest, Santhal Pargana, Circle Deoghar, who by order dated 20.6.1996 held that the Confiscation of the Mill was illegal.

4. The Petitioner has further stated that the criminal case which was instituted against the Petitioner on the same allegations was tried and the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, by his Judgment dated 6.8.1997 held that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the allegations and accordingly, he acquitted the accused for allegations leveled against under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act and. Section 14 of Bihar Kashtha Chiran (Vinimiyan) Act, 1990 and the Petitioner was discharged from the liabilities of bail bonds. No appeal was filed by the Respondents against the Judgment dated 6.8.1997. A photocopy of the aforementioned Judgment dated 6.8.1997 is Annexure-1 to the Writ Petition.

5. Pursuant to the aforementioned Judgment, the Petitioner filed an application that since he had been given a clean acquittal, therefore, the matter relating to grant of licence pending since 1995 should be taken up and licence should be granted and renewed so that the Petitioner could carry on his business. Since the Respondents went on sitting tight over the matter, the Petitioner filed an application on 12.1.2001 vide annexure 2. The Petitioner has stated that on 7.2.1997, the Respondent No. 3 (Divisional Forest Officer, Deoghar) asked the Petitioner to be present on 18.2.1997 along with all documents for purposes of registration/renewal. Copy of this letter has been marked as Annexure-4. Pursuant to the aforementioned letter dated 7.2.1997, the Petitioner approached the Respondent No. 3 but the grievance of the Petitioner is, that inspite of this, the Respondents are sitting tight over the matter for reasons best known to them.

6. The Petitioner has further made a grievance that on 29.12.2000 the Respondents again seized the Saw Mill of the Petitioner together with 63 pieces of wood which were termed to be illegal although the Petitioner went on showing valid documents in support of his contention that the wood had been validly purchased and bought on the basis of a valid loading certificate.

7. On the basis of the aforesaid seizure, Confiscation Case No. 27 of 2000 was started against the Petitioner and the Petitioner has asserted that this Confiscation Case is illegal because the wood had been validly purchased and inspite of valid documents having been shown, the Respondents went on treating the wood to have been illegally procured. Consequently, the Petitioner filed Writ Petition CWJC