N.N.TIWARI, J. - (1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to pass an order on the petitioners application for renewal of Licence No. 2 dated 17th March, 1983 granted to his firm under the provisions of Section 5 of the Jharkhand Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990.
(2.) IT has been stated that the petitioners father, namely, Ram Charan Rana had established the Saw Mill/Depot in Barhi on Patna Road in the district of Hazaribagh. Licence was granted in his name as far back as on 17th March, 1983 by the Divisional Forrest Officer -cum -Licensing Authority, West Forest Division, Hazaribagh. The licence was renewed/extended from time to time. Thereafter, some proceeding under the provisions of the Forest Act was initiated against the petitioner and on that ground, the licence was cancelled by the Divisional Forest Officer by Memo No. 312 dated 25th January, 2000. Subsequently, the petitioner deposited the amount of penalty and the proceeding was dropped on the basis of settlement dated 30th November, 2002. In view thereof, the Divisional Forrest Officer, Hazaribagh sent a letter to the petitioner asking him to submit application for renewal of the licence of Saw Mill, if he so desires. The petitioner responding to the said letter applied for renewal of the licence in the year 2005, but till date, the same has been kept pending and no order has been passed by the Licensing Authority. The petitioner made several requests and filed representation, but the same has also not been heeded upon. Mr. H.K. Mehta learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents, submitted that the petitioners licence was cancelled, as certain irregularities were found and the terms of the licence were violated. A proceeding was also initiated against the petitioner. As stated above, the petitioner had deposited the amount of penalty and the matter was dropped. Only because the proceeding is dropped, the petitioner is not entitled for renewal of the licence. However, he may apply for a fresh licence, which can be considered on its own merit. The petitioner has not applied for a fresh licence, but has filed an application for renewal/revival of the licence, which is not in accordance with the provisions of law, and thus the respondents are not obliged to pass any order on such application.
(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and considered the facts and materials on record.;