JUDGMENT :

The instant intra-court appeal, under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, is directed against the order/judgment dated 06.12.2021 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) No. 6547 of 2011 whereby and whereunder the writ petition was dismissed declining to interfere with order dated 16.04.2004 passed in Confiscation Revision Case No. 18/2003 by Commissioner-cum-Revisional Authority, against order dated 24.03.2003 in Confiscation Appeal No. XV/57/2001-2002, by which the revision application was allowed and order passed in Confiscation Appeal was set aside.

2. The brief facts of the case, as per pleadings made in the writ petition, which require to be enumerated read as hereunder:

The writ petitioner-appellant, who claims to be the owner of Truck bearing Registration No. BRC/7521, purchased some Sagwan wood on 22.08.1999 for his own use from M/s Dayal Timber Works, Timber Merchant & Order Supplier, Upper Bazar, Ranchi on cash payment vide Bill No. 133/1999-2000 and 134/99- 2000. It is alleged that the petitioner, after purchase of the said wood, carried out the wood by bus to Daltonganj and from Daltonganj Bus Stand, he carried the said Teak wood Planks by his Truck bearing Registration No. BRC-7521 to his residential house but in the way the police seized the said truck along with 17 pieces of Teak Wood Planks. It is stated that though the petitioner tried his best to convince the police party that the seized woods are not illegal and purchased from authorized Timber Merchant but the police lodged an F.I.R. being Sadar (Daltonganj) P.S. Case No. 287 of 1999 under Sections 413/414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 33 of the Forest Act. Subsequently, the Officer-in-Charge, Sadar (Daltonganj) communicated a report vide letter no. 1311 dated 05.09.1999 to the Divisional Forest Officer, Daltonganj, basis upon which Confiscation Case No. 9 of 1999 was initiated against the petitioner, in which, the authority concerned passed order on 29.05.2000 directing to confiscate the Truck bearing Registration No. BRC-7521 as also 17 planks of Sagwan woods, as seized by the police. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner preferred appeal, before the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau, being Confiscation Appeal No. XV/7/2000-2001, which was disposed of vide order dated 12.09.2001 remanding the matter for passing fresh order in respect of the offence committed. Pursuant to the aforesaid order a fresh order was passed by the Confiscation Authority on 06.11.2001 in the said Confiscation Case No. 9 of 1999, by which, again the order of confiscation of truck as also 17 planks of Sagwan was passed.

Being aggrieved, the petitioner again preferred appeal being Confiscation Appeal No. XV/57/2001-2002, which was allowed by the appellate authority- Deputy Commissioner, Palamau vide order dated 24.03.2003 setting aside the order passed in Confiscation Case.

It is further case of the writ petitioner that after disposal of appeal, being Confiscation Appeal No. XV/57/2001-2002, the petitioner filed a petition before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau on 28.03.2003 for release of confiscated truck along with 17 pieces of Sagwan woods, which was allowed vide order dated 17.04.2003 and the seized truck along with wood was released in favour of petitioner on 24.04.2003 on furnishing of required security bond.

In the meantime, the respondents-authority preferred revision, before the Commissioner-cum- Secretary-cum-Revisional Authority, Department of Forest & Environment, being Confiscation Revision No. 18/2003 which was allowed vide order dated 16.04.2004, by which, the petitioner was directed to surrender the confiscated truck.

The writ petitioner, being aggrieved with the aforesaid order approached this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 6547 of 2011 on the ground that the revisional authority did not consider the fact that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau vide order dated 17.04.2003 in G.R. Case No. 942 of 1999 had already passed order