- (1.) THIS writ petition was referred to the Division Bench by the learned Single Judge by order dated 30th June, 2004, having regard to the issues involved.
(2.) THE writ petitioner is a partnership firm which was engaged in the business of operating a saw mill, established in the year, 1972, situated in Ward No. VI, Holding No. 26/A. Old Hazaribag Road, which conies under the Ranchi Municipal Corporation. The petitioner was granted a licence under the Bihar Factories Rules, 1950 and the Factories Act, 1948 and is also registered under the Bihar Rules for the Establishment of Saw Pits and Establishment and Regulation of Depots, 1983. The business of operating saw mills is regulated at present by the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) 1990, which requires the person who is desirous of operating a saw mill to obtain a licence for the same. Section 7 of the said Act makes a provision regarding grant, renewal, revocation or suspension of such licence. Rule 3 of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Rules, 1993 provides for obtaining such licence and Rule 4 provides for grant of the same. Rule 6 provides for renewal of licences already granted.
(3.) IN keeping with the provisions of the aforesaid Regulation and the Rules, the petitioner applied for and was granted a licence under the aforesaid Act for the calendar year, 1995 and the same was renewed each year upto the year, 2002. In compliance with the provisions of the aforesaid Act and, in particular, Rule 6 of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Rules, 1993, the petitioner applied to the Licensing Officer for renewal of its licence for the year, 2003 by its application dated 25th November, 2002. In response to its said application, the petitioner was served with a notice to show -cause dated 11th March, 2003 issued by the Licensing Authority -cum -Divisional Forest Officer, Ranchi East Forest Division, Ranchi, respondent No. 5 herein, informing the petitioner that the petitioner's saw mill had not been functioning as per the required monthly capacity and that the petitioner's saw mill was found closed during the inspection visit by respondent No. 5. The petitioner duly filed its reply to the show -cause notice denying the charges contained in the said notice and stating that the saw mill had not ceased to operate and may have been closed on a particular date for some reason or other which could not be the basis for an assumption that the saw mill had been permanently closed down. However, on 22nd December, 2003, the respondent No. 5 passed an order cancelling the licence of the petitioner's saw mill and refusing to renew the same for the calendar year, 2003. Aggrieved by the said refusal order of the concerned authority in renewing its licence to run the saw mill and/or revoking the same, the writ petitioner has moved the instant writ petition.;