The main legal point established in the judgment is that the deemed permission for cutting trees arises after the lapse of a stipulated period from the date of the reminder, and the permission granted or deemed to be granted holds good only for the calendar year in which it has been granted or deemed to have been granted, requiring fresh permission for work beyond the calendar year.

R.S. Jha, J.

1. This petition has been referred to a Full Bench by the learned Single Judge by order dated 21-1-2002 doubting the correctness of the decision of this Court rendered in the cases of Raghubir Singh v. Board of Revenue and Ors. 1984 RN 382 and Kanhaiyalal v. State of M.P. and Ors. M.P. No. 75 of 1983, decided on 24-6-1983.

2. The brief facts, leading to the present reference, are that the petitioner, who is Bhumiswami of Khasra No. 268/2, area 0.607 hectares of Village Changotola, Patwari Circle No. 3, Tehsil and District Balaghat, filed an application on 24-2-1997 before Collector, Balaghat for permission to cut three Bija trees standing on her fields. As no order or communication was received by the petitioner in response to the application, filed by her, she gave a reminder on 26-6-1997 which was received by the Collector on 21-8-1997 and, thereafter, again on 4-12-1997, 5-2- 1998 and ultimately on 2-4-1998 as is evident from a perusal of the order passed by the Collector dated 31-5-1999. Ultimately, on receiving no response the petitioner proceeded to cut the Bija trees on 2-4-1998.

3. A show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 7- 7-1998 by the respondent authorities under Section 241(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') and thereafter by order dated 31-5-1999 a penalty of Rs. 200/- was imposed upon the petitioner and twenty pieces of wood obtained from cutting the Bija trees were confiscated. The appeal, filed by the petitioner, before the Commissioner, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur against the order dated 31-5-1999 passed by the Collector also suffered dismissal by order dated 5-11-1999. Being aggrieved by which the petitioner has filed the present petition before this Court.

4. It was submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner before the learned Single Judge that in accordance with Rules 3 and 4 of the Rules published by notification No. 218-6477-VI-N (Rules), dated 6-1-1960, in the M.P. Rajpatra, dated 22-1-1960 framed in exercise of powers under Section 241 of the Code, as the petitioner applied for cutting of the Bija trees on 24-2-1997, and thereafter submitted several reminders to which she did not receive any reply within a further period of three months, it was deemed that the Collector has agreed to the cutting of the Bija trees and consequently the petitioner proceeded to cut the Bija trees on 2-4-1998 which act on her part is in conformity with the provisions of Section 241 read with Rules 3 and 4 of the Rules notified thereunder and, therefore, the impugned orders passed by the Collector and the Commissioner be quashed and the 20 pieces of wood be released to her.

5. Refuting the claim of the petitioner, it was submitted by the respondents before the learned Single Judge in the return that the Bija trees have been cut by the petitioner without obtaining any permission as required by the Rules and have further contended that even if the provisions of granting deemed permission to the petitioner is applied, the said deemed permission was operative only till the end of the calendar year and, therefore, the felling of trees by the petitioner in the next calendar year amounts to violation of the provisions of Section 241 of the Code and the Rules framed thereunder and in such circumstances the impugned orders passed by the Collector and Commissioner being in conformity with law, do not call for any interference by this Court.

6. Before the learned Single Judge, the learned Counsel for the petitioner had relied upon the judgment rendered in the case of Raghubir Singh (supra) and Kanhaiyalal (supra). The relevant facts in the case of Raghubir Singh (supra), were that the petitioner therein had applied on 12-6-1979, seeking permission to cut trees under Section 241 of the Code before the Collector. An enquiry was made on the application filed by the petitioner and on 19-10-1979 the Tehsildar Seoni-Malwa submitted a report recommending gra