JUDGMENT

(Per Sri Justice Ravi Cheemalapati)

This Letter Patent Appeal has been preferred by the State feeling aggrieved by the orders dated 03.01.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the Writ Petition No.19783 of 2023 filed by the respondent herein was allowed.

2. Appellants herein were respondents and respondent herein was writ petitioner in the Writ Petition covered by the orders impugned in this Writ Appeal.

3. The grievance of the writ petitioner as set out in the writ affidavit, in nutshell, is that he purchased a saw mill in the year 2011 to which licence was obtained in the year 2000, and his request for change of ownership and shifting location of the saw mill was considered by the District Forest Officer, Nellore vide proceedings dated 22.10.2011, but thereafter, the District Forest Officer issued notices dated 07.03.2014, 11.04.2014 and 17.06.2014, cancelling the permission granted vide proceedings in Rc.No.4981/1999/F9, dated 06.11.2012, on the ground that the saw mill is located within a distance of 5 Km. from nearest forest boundary. It is further stated that the petitioner, aggrieved thereby, filed writ petition vide W.P.No.28856 of 2014, wherein interim orders were granted restraining the respondents from taking any action in pursuance of the notice dated 17.06.2014. It is further stated that on 31.03.2019, as the Forest Range Officer, Kavali, had directed the petitioner not to run the saw mill, the petitioner filed another writ petition vide W.P.No.5482 of 2019 and pursuant to the orders passed therein to the effect that saw mill license was lapsed and unless the petitioner makes a proper application as per Rules, he cannot claim any relief; the petitioner submitted application dated 16.09.2022 in Form-I as prescribed in Andhra Pradesh Wood Based Industries (Establishment and Regulation) Rules, 2018 (for short, “the Rules,2018”). It is further stated that in the meeting held on 15.07.2020, the authorities had decided to renew the similarly situated lapsed saw mill licenses located within a distance of 3.43 km and 0.81 km., however the said benefit had not been extended to the subject saw mill, which is located at a distance of 4.62 km. from the nearest reserve forest and aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed another writ petition vide W.P.No.37145 of 2022 and during its pendency, the impugned proceedings dated 28.03.2023 were passed, disregard the fact that Rule 3(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Wood Based Industries(Establishment and Regulation) Rules, 2018 is not applicable to the subject saw mill, which was established prior to 2018. The inaction of the Chief Conservator of Forests and Head of Forest Force in renewing the saw mill license as well as issuance of proceedings dated 28.03.2023 were questioned by filing the writ petition covered by the orders impugned in the writ petition.

4. The respondents in the writ petition, through counter of the District Forest Officer, Nellore, justified their action, contending that, as per Rule-10 of the Rules, 2018, the license stood lapsed for failure to renew it within the stipulated time i.e. by the end of February and consequently, the petitioner had to apply for fresh license by submission of Form-I. It is further stated that petitioner did not submit Form-I application in time within the time stipulated as per Rules and therefore, the application submitted by the petitioner dated 16.09.2022 was treated as an application for fresh license with antecedents of lapsed category license holder and proceedings impugned in the writ petition were issued. There are no valid grounds warranting interference of this Court.

Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

5. The learned single Judge, upon considering the pleadings as well as submissions made by learned counsel for both parties, allowed the writ petition, holding that the interim orders granted in the writ petitions filed by the petitioner saves the license granted to the saw mill from being lapsed, directed