Nilgiris Timbers. Vs. the Additional Principal Conservator

Nilgiris Timbers vs The Additional Principal Conservator

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Apr 17, 2012

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/927137

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/927137
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: R.Sudhakar, J.
Decided On: Apr 17, 2012
Case Number: Writ Petition No.10044 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2012
Subject: Constitution

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

[R.SUDHAKAR, J.] Constitution of India - Articles 226 -- Petitioner has made an application dated 15.2.2010 for grant of licence to run the Sawmill as required under the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 to the second respondent District Forest Officer.

Key legal issue: Constitution
Acts & sections: Constitution of India - Articles 226; Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nilgiris Timbers

Advocate Mr.R.V.Babu, Adv.

Respondent

The Additional Principal Conservator

Advocate Mr.Balaji, Adv.

Legal References

Acts: Constitution of India - Articles 226; Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010

Excerpt

[r.sudhakar, j.] constitution of india - articles 226 -- petitioner has made an application dated 15.2.2010 for grant of licence to run the sawmill as required under the tamil nadu regulation of wood based industries rules, 2010 to the second respondent district forest officer......and consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose of the petitioner's application dated 15.2.2010 for renewing the petitioner's license for running sawmill as per the provisions of the tamil nadu regulation of wood based industries rules, 2010 within a stipulated time.order1. writ petition is filed praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records of the third respondent in na.ka.no.355/2011 dated 15.3.2012 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose of the petitioner's application dated 15.2.2010 for renewing the petitioner's license for running sawmill as per the provisions of the tamil nadu regulation of wood based industries rules, 2010 within a stipulated time.2. mr.balaji, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents. by consent the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.3. petitioner has made an application dated 15.2.2010 for grant of licence to run the sawmill as required under the tamil nadu regulation of wood based industries rules, 2010 to the second respondent district forest officer. he also relies upon the recommendation of the third respondent forest ranger who states that the application of the petitioner has been forwarded to the central empower committee constituted in accordance with the direction of the hon'ble supreme court and his recommendation letter na.ka.no.323/2011 dated 17.11.2011 is available in the typeset of papers at page no.10. since the approval has not been granted, the impugned order has been passed on 15.3.2012 to close the industries. this is under challenge.4. in similar circumstances, it has been clearly held by this court that unless and until the approval is granted by the central empower committee and the licence is granted in accordance with the tamil nadu regulation of wood based industries rules, 2010 the petitioner cannot have no right to run the sawmill and this become necessary in view of the specific.....

Full Judgment

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.355/2011 dated 15.3.2012 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose of the petitioner's application dated 15.2.2010 for renewing the petitioner's license for running Sawmill as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 within a stipulated time.

ORDER

1. Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.355/2011 dated 15.3.2012 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose of the petitioner's application dated 15.2.2010 for renewing the petitioner's license for running Sawmill as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 within a stipulated time.

2. Mr.Balaji, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

3. Petitioner has made an application dated 15.2.2010 for grant of licence to run the Sawmill as required under the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 to the second respondent District Forest Officer. He also relies upon the recommendation of the third respondent Forest Ranger who states that the application of the petitioner has been forwarded to the Central Empower Committee constituted in accordance with the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and his recommendation letter Na.Ka.No.323/2011 dated 17.11.2011 is available in the typeset of papers at page No.10. Since the approval has not been granted, the impugned order has been passed on 15.3.2012 to close the industries. This is under challenge.

4. In similar circumstances, it has been clearly held by this Court that unless and until the approval is granted by the Central Empower Committee and the licence is granted in accordance with the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Wood Based Industries Rules, 2010 the petitioner cannot have no right to run the Sawmill and this become necessary in view of the specific order passed by the Supreme Court in W.P.(C)No.202/1995 dated 12.12.1996 and the orders passed thereon from time to time, more particularly, the order dated 30.10.2002 in I.A.No.566/2000 in W.P.(C)No.202/95.

5. In such view of the matter, the respondents 2 and 3 are directed to pursue the matter with the Central Empower Committee and decide the claim of the petitioner for granting licence expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2012 Same Parties Nilgiris Timbers vs The Additional Principal Conservator Same Subject Constitution Same Judge R.Sudhakar, J. Acts & Sections Constitution of India - Articles 226; Tamil Nadu Regulation o...

Constitution