- (1.) THE petitioner filed an appeal in the Court of Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, against the order of confiscation passed under section 52 of Forest Act, 1927. It was registered as Confiscation (Forest) Appeal No. 4/2005 arising out of Confiscation Case No. 9/2004.
(2.) WITHOUT admitting the case, the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, by her marginal notes dated 5th July, 2005, on the caption of the appeal, rejected the appeal on the ground that there appeared no prima facie case made out for interference. The writ petition was filed on 21st November, 2005, with a copy of the same to the counsel for the State, but no counter -affidavit has been filed by the respondents. From the caption of the appeal on which notes dated 5th July, 2005, given by the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, it is evident that the Officer did not choose to record the order in the order -sheet but had given her notes on the caption of the appeal itself as if she was giving notes in a file generally dealt with by the Administrative Officers. Though the appeal was to be determined on merit, but, by a cryptic order, it was rejected on the ground that there appeared no prima facie case made out for interference. The Deputy Commissioner, while deciding the appeal, should have kept in mind that she was functioning as appellate authority, which was quasi -judicial in nature, and was not 'passing any administrative order as an Officer of the State. She should not pass such order on the caption of the appeal petition in future and decide the appeal on merit by drawing order -sheet.
(3.) THE notes dated 5th July, 2005, given by the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, on the caption of the appeal petition are set aside. The appeal is remitted with direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, to decide the appeal on merit after notice and hearing the parties, preferably within a period of two months. The petitioner should appear before the Officer, who will fix the date for hearing. The writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions.;