Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.

1. The writ petitioner, in this case, has mainly, challenged the State Governments policy decision for regulating the number of saw-mills in the State and particularly the directions issued regarding grant of fresh licence and renewal of licence for running saw-mills in the state. He has also challenged the order of rejection of his application for renewal of licence/suspension of licence and the order, asking the petitioner to shift his saw-mill at a minimum distance of 5 K.Ms. from the Notified Forest Area in view of the policy decision.

2. The said decision of the Government was circulated by Letter No. 343 dated 28th October, 2000 (Annexure-3) issued under the signature of the Secretary, Government of Bihar (as then was) to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, whereby a direction had been issued, prohibiting running of saw-mills, veneer mills, plywood mills and other timber based industries within 5 K.Ms. from the Notified Forest Area. And further, to direct the saw-mills running within the area to shift at a minimum distance of 5 K.Ms. from the Notified Forest Area. The said letter had been issued on the basis of the recommendation of the Expert Committee, constituted by the then Government of Bihar pursuant to the direction issued by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India and Ors. .

3. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Jharkhand, Ranchi vide Letter No. 1802 dated 16th May, 2001 directed its subordinate authorities to direct all such saw-mills situated within 5 K.Ms. from the Notified Forest Area to move 5 K.Ms. away from the Notified Forest Area within two years.

4. The State of Jharkhand was created with effect from 15th November, 2000 under the provisions of Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000.

5. The Commissioner and Secretary, Department of Forest & Environment, Government of Jharkhand, by his Letter No. 3730 dated 22nd July, 2003 (Annexure-11) adopted and approved the said policy decision of the Government of the predecessor State of Bihar dated 28th October, 2000 and directed all concerned to implement the said directions and the decisions.

6. The petitioner has challenged the said decisions, contained in Annexures-3 and 11.

7. The petitioner has also challenged the order of the Licensing Authority- cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Gumla Forest Division, issued by Letter No. 1445 dated 20th May, 2003 whereby validity period of petitioners saw-mill Licence No. 15 dated 18th December, 1989 was reduced from 31st December, 2003 to 10th July, 2003 (the time was earlier valid up to 31st December, 2003). According to the petitioner, the said letter is violative of Rule 6(4) of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Rules, 1993 as also Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.

8. The petitioner has sought to further assail the Letter No. 2669 dated 30th July, 2003 (Annexure-6) issued by the Licensing Authority whereby the petitioners saw-mill licence was suspended with immediate effect on the ground that the petitioner has not shifted his saw-mill till 10th July, 2003 and has also prayed for quashing the Letter No. 84 dated 10th January, 2004 (Annexure-13), whereby the petitioner was asked to show cause as to why the application dated 9th December, 2003 for renewal of licence of saw-mill for the Calendar year 2004 be not rejected on the ground that the petitioner has not shifted his saw-mill, which according to the petitioner virtually amounts to refusal of renewal of the petitioners saw-mill licence on an extraneous ground.

9. According to the petitioner, it has been doing the business of saw-mill at Bano, District Simdega, since the year 1989 after obtaining the licence, being No. 15 dated 18th December, 1989.

10. The said licence was granted to the petitioner Under Section 5 of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990 read with Rule 3 of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Rules, 1993 (hereinafter to be referred as the said Act/said Rules)

11. T