TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (12) TMI 687
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ra, Aparna Bhat, Sanjay Parikh, P. Ramesh Kumar, Atul Yeshwant Chitale, Ravikesh Sinha, Suchitra Atul Chitale, Rajiv Tyagi, S.M. Shah, B.B. Singh, A. Subba Rao, C.V. Subba Rao, Naresh K. Sharma, Naresh Chandra Sahoo, Swetaketu Mishra, Moushumi Gahlot, Shibashish Misra, V.S. Raju, T.N. Rao, Raj Kumar Mehta, Janaranjan Das, M.L. Lahoty, Paban K. Sharma, Himanshu Shekhar, S. Guru Krishna Kumar, Prakash Shrivastava, S. Wasim, A. Quadri, Pramod Dayal, S.P. Singh, Sangeeta Mandal, Pankaj Saxena, Kapil Choudhary, Jayasree Singh, Swati Sinha and Vineeta Bhardwaj, Advs. for, Pooran Singh Bundela, Adv., Tara Chandra Sharma, Neelam Sharma, Avijit Bhattacharjee, Atanu Saikia, Hemantika Wahi, Sandhya Goswami, L.R. Singh (NP), V.N. Raghupathy (NP), P.N. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 4 of Orissa Saw Mills and Saw Pits (Control), Act, 1991 prohibits establishment or operation of saw mills within reserve forest, protected forest or any forest area or within 10 kilometers from the boundary of any forest or forest area. The licences of five saw mills were cancelled by the Divisional Forest Officer (DFO) as a licensing authority as licensees were found to be within a radial distances of 10 kilometers from the boundary of nearest forest. The following are those saw mills: 1. Laxmi Saw Mills, Lingipur 2. Bhawani Saw Mill, Lingipur 3. Gopinath Timber Saw Mill, Balakati 4. Sidheswari Saw Mills, Balakati 5. Siula Saw Mill (Maa Tarini Timber Trades) 3. The cancellation of licences....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... notice, the respondent has filed his affidavit. We have perused affidavit of the respondent dated 20th September, 2003 and have also heard Shri P.P. Rao, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent. While tendering unconditional apology, the respondent has sought to explain that since he joined as Divisional Forest Officer, Puri Division only on 23rd December, 2002, he was not very much conversant with the latest developments in the management of forest division in general and the order of this Court dated 30th October, 2002, in particular. He has tried to explain that when the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Orissa, vide a memo dated 27th December, 2002, sent the case of Laxmi Saw Mill, Lingipur and Bhawani Saw Mill, Lingip....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 2002 in addition to the further fact of the appeals of the saw mills having been dismissed as above narrated. 7. From the affronted facts, it is clear that the grant of licences to saw mills by the respondent was in clear violation of order of this Court. The plea that the respondent came to know about the orders of this Court only on 16th January, 2003 and in ignorance of the said orders, the licences were granted is not tenable for more than one reason. Firstly, it appears that the said order was sent to the office of the respondent on 30th December, 2002 and the licences were granted for the first time on 13th January, 2003. Secondly, assuming the respondent came to know of the order on 16th January, 2003, as claimed, he took no act....