IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.2710 OF 2016 (GM-FOR) BETWEEN:
H.MANJUNATHA, S/O LATE H.R.HIRIYANNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, M/S.RANGANATHA SAWMILL, DEVARAYAPATTANA, B.M.ROAD, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 204.
… PETITIONER (BY SRI. PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY H., ADV., - ABSENT) AND:
1. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, ARANYA BHAVAN, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU – 560 003.
2. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, HASSAN DIVISION, ARANYA BHAVAN, DAIRY CIRCLE, B.M.ROAD, HASSAN – 573 201.
3. ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND DEPUTY CONSERVATOR FOREST TECHNICAL ADVISOR, HASSAN DIVISION, ARANYA BHAVAN, DAIRY CIRCLE, B.M.ROAD, HASSAN – 573 201.
4. RANGE FOREST OFFICER, HASSAN DIVISION, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 204.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYKUMAR A PATIL, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 DATED 26.06.2015 & 28.12.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE – A.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Mr. Vijayakumar A. Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents, the matter is heard finally.
2. In this writ petition, petitioner, inter alia, assailed the validity of the order dated 26.06.2015 passed by the Respondent No.2.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the controversy involved in this petition is squarely covered by the order dated 21.02.2019 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.44216/2016.
4. In view of the aforesaid submission, writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal, if so advised, as provided under Rule 163[10] of the Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969 before the Appellate Authority.
5. It is directed that in case petitioner files an appeal along with application for stay within three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, the Appellate Authority shall consider the same in accordance with law. The ad- interim order granted by a Bench of this Court shall continue till the application for stay preferred by the petitioner is decided by the Appellate Authority.
6. Accordingly, petition is disposed of.
Needless to state that the appeal as well as application for stay shall be decided by the Appellate Authority by a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties.
Sd/- JUDGE AN/-