The main legal point established in the judgment is that the failure to obtain a valid license and the mandatory requirement to seek permission from the Central Empowered Committee justified the rejection of the application for a saw mill license.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 6th April, 2005 which has been passed by the Regional director, Samajik Vaniki Van Prabhag, fatehpur (hereinafter referred to as the regional Director) rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for grant of Saw Mill licence. The said order was passed pursuant to the directions issued by this Court on 21st January, 2005 in Writ Petition No. 27395 of 2004.

( 2 ) THE facts stated in the petition reveal that earlier the Saw Mill belonged to Sri Ram agarwal who had been granted a licence to run saw mill. The saw mill was sold to one sri Narendra Kumar Singh on 2nd February, 1989 and thereafter it was sold by Sri narendra Kumar Singh to the petitioner for a consideration of Rs. 25. 000/ -. The petitioner then submitted an application dated 2nd April, 1989 to the Range Officer for transfer of the licence in his favour and for permission to deposit the renewal licence fee. It appears on the basis of the aforesaid application, the petitioner deposited the licence fee of Rs. 1. 000/- in 1990, 1991 and 1992. The licence was, however, not renewed and, therefore, the petitioner filed a writ petition in this Court which was disposed of on 20th October. 2003 with a direction to decide the representation of the petitioner. The application of the petitioner for renewal of the licence was rejected and this was challenged by the petitioner by filing a writ petition being Writ Petition No. 12350 of 2004 which was disposed of on 25th March, 2004 with a direction that the application filed by the petitioner for grant of saw mill licence shall be considered afresh in accordance with law. By the order dated 24th June, 2004 the application was again rejected. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed yet another Writ Petition No. 27395 of 2004. The court by means of the judgment and order dated 28th January, 2005 set aside the order dated 24th June, 2004 and remanded the matter back to the Regional Director to decide it afresh in accordance with law. Pursuant to the aforesaid directions of this court, the matter has been considered at length by the Regional Director in the order dated 6th April, 2005 which has been impugned in the present petition.

( 3 ) WE have heard the petitioner in person and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents and have perused the material available on record.

( 4 ) THE petitioner in person has assailed the order dated 6th April, 2005 contending that once the petitioner was permitted to deposit the licence fee, the respondents could not have refused the grant of the licence and in any view of the matter, the order of the Supreme Court his not been correctly interpreted by the Regional Director. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand has supported the impugned order and has submitted that there is no infirmity as it is based upon the orders issued by the Supreme Court from time to time.

( 5 ) WE have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the parties. Before examining the rival contentions, we consider it proper to refer to the Rules framed by the state Government and to the orders passed by the Supreme Court from time to time with regard to the grant of licence to the Saw mills.

( 6 ) THE State Government has framed the "uttar Pradesh Establishment and Regulation of Saw-mills Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the rules ). Rule 2 defines saw-mills to mean and include any mechanical device whether operating with electric power, fuel power or man power for the purpose of cutting, sawing or converting, timber and wood into pit cos or the like acts. Rule 3 provides that no person shall establish, erect or operate any saw-mill or machinery for converting or cutting vimber and wood without obtaining a licence from the divisional Forest Officer concerned. Under rule 4 an application has to be submitted by person desiring to establish, erect or operate any existing Saw Mill to the Divisional forest Officer concerned for obt

Click Here to Read the rest of this document