- (1.) DHARAM Veer, J. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for writ of mandamus com manding the Respondent No. 3 to issue him transit pass (Ravanna) for transpor tation of wood logs from Suakot Pokhari to Haldwani Town.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case as nar rated by the petitioner are that petitioner is permanent resident of Village Suwakot Pokhari, Patti Padampur, Tehsil Dhari and Bhumidhar Tenure Holder of Khet No. 869, 871, 902, 903, 1000, 1001, 1002, 1003/2 and 30 situ ated in the revenue area of the said vil lage and some trees of different varie ties were also situated in the bhumidhari land of the petitioner. The petitioner moved an application before the District Magistrate, Nainital with a prayer to is sue ownership certificate about the said trees. The District Magistrate, Nainital after making necessary enquiry issued ownership certificate of the trees in fa vour of the petitioner. Thereafter, the pe titioner moved an application before Respondent No. 3 to cut the trees which were dry and effected by the diseases. The Respondent No. 3 thereafter called a report from the Van Kshetridhikari' 'dana'. After receiving the said report of Van Kshetridhikari Danda, the Respond ent No. 3 granted permission to cut the eleven trees of 'sal', two trees of 'sain' and one tree of Tun'. The permission to mark the trees and cutting the trees was given vide letter dated 02-06-2000 by Respondent No. 3 and period of com pletion of cutting the trees was upto 30-07-2000 and a copy of this permission letter was also forwarded to District Magistrate, S. S. P. Nainital and Incharge of Sharda Range. It has been stated in the writ petition that the petitioner cut the trees permission of which was given by the Forest Officials and their logs were also collected in the presence of the De partmental Officers. The Respondent No. 3 granted transit pass to transport the cutted logs to nearest town Haldwani and the transit permission was valid from 8- 6-2001 to 13-06-2001. It has been alleged in the writ petition that the petitioner got some logs transported to Haldwani but some logs remained at the spot untransported due to starting of rainy season and transit pass was not extended and wood logs are still lying at the spot. Thereafter, on 12-5- 2004 the petitioner moved an application with the prayer to issue transit pass before the Re spondent No. 3. The Respondent No. 3 thereafter called a report from the sub ordinate forest officials about the mat ter. Thereafter, again on 5-1-2005, the petitioner again moved an application for insurance of transit pass for the trans portation of logs. The Respondent No. 3 again called a report from Sub- Divi sional Forest Officer, Haldwani vide let ter dated 07-02-2005. In compliance of the report required by Respondent No. 3, the Van Kshetradhikari gave his report about the position of the wood logs ly ing at the spot. On the basis of the above report given by Van Kshetradhikari, the petitioner has filed this writ petition with the prayer to com mand the respondent No. 3 to issue him transit pass Ravanna for transportation of wood logs from Suakot Pokhari to Haldwani town. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondent No. 3 by Sri Kapil Lal, D. FO. Haldwani, Nainital, in which it has been stated that the per mission was granted permission for cut ting eleven Sal Trees, two Sain Trees and one Tun tree from his own settled land on the recommendation and report of District Magistrate, Nainital and on the basis of spot inspection report of Dy. Divisional Forest Officer (Sharda) by Di visional Forest Officer, Haldwani vide sanction letter dated 2-6-2000. Thereat ter, the transit permission was granted to the petitioner by Divisional Forest Officer, Haldwani vide his permission letter dated 7-6-2001 and according to the said letter, the petitioner was directed to tran sit the Timber Trees from 8-6-2001 to 13-8-2001 via Chaurgalia-Dani Bangar to Haldwani as prayed by the petitioner and for that purpose, eight transit passes were also issued to the petitioner. It has also been stated that like the petitioner several other villages/farmers of Village Suwakot also applied for cutting and transit of dried trees standing in their settled agricultural plots at the relevant time and permission was granted to them also. It was noticed in the relevant pe riod that some of the villagers of the aforesaid village have made unauthor ized and illegal felling of 28 Sal trees, 9 Pine trees and 1 Tun tree in the adjoin ing forest of Village Suwakot with a view to transit the aforesaid illegal felled trees/timber alongwith the Timber col lected from the felling of the trees from their settled land for which they have ob tained sanction. The Timber made from the aforesaid illegal cutting was collected at different places and road side of the adjoining reserve forest and report was also lodged against the aforesaid crime by the department and proceeding was started under the Indian Forest Act. De partmental proceedings were also initi ated against the concerned officials of Forest Department who were prima facie found responsible for the aforesaid illegal felling. It has also been stated that the petitioner has exhausted the transit per mission and transit passes issued to him in the 2001 and since 2001, he did not make any further request stating that he could not transit all the Timber. There after, the petitioner submitted an appli cation dated 12-5-2004 and 6-1- 2005 wherein he has only stated that transit pass be issued to him regarding trans portation of the sanctioned Timber from his settled land. On the application of the petitioner, a report was caused for from the Range Officer, Dunda Forest Range, Durga Pipal who submitted his report to Sub Divisional Officer wherein he has given certain details regarding the Timber and its measurement said to be belonging to the petitioner. However, the Sub Divisional Officer after considering the report of Range Officer further di rected him to clarify by a supplementary report whether the said Timber is lying in the settled land of the petitioner or in the reserve forest by his order dated 18-06-2005.
(3.) THEREAFTER, the Forest Ranger sub mitted his second report dated 21-6-2005 wherein he stated that the said Timber re garding which he has given his earlier report is lying at various places near motor road in reserve forest area far away from the Village Suwakot Pokhari. It has fur ther been stated in the report that there is no hammer mark of the petitioner in the Timber. (Hammer mark is a mark impressed in the log/timber by the person to whom sanction is granted and for that purpose he is also given hammer mark by the Forest Department ). The Forest Ranger also clarified that the petitioner has not even sought any permission to transport and collect the Timber from his settled land to the reserve forest area. Thus, since the log/timber is lying in the forest area and there is no hammer mark of the pe titioner in it, as such it cannot be said that the Timber for which the petitioner is seek ing transit pass belongs to him. After re ceiving the aforesaid report, the Dy. Divi sional Forest Officer, Sharda Forest Divi sion, Haldwani declined to give recom mendation for issuing transit pass to the petitioner. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material available on record.;