9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Closure of unlicensed saw mills and prohibition of new saw mills without permission. 2. Cancellation of licenses of saw mills within forest areas. 3. Granting of licenses by the respondent in violation of court orders. 4. Respondent's defense and explanation. 5. State government's position on the matter. 6. Contempt of court and punishment imposed. Analysis: Issue 1: The Supreme Court directed the closure of all unlicensed saw mills and prohibited the opening of new ones without prior permission to protect forest wealth and prevent illegal timber utilization. Issue 2: Under the Orissa Saw Mills and Saw Pits (Control) Act, 1991, licenses of five saw mills were canceled for being within prohibited distances from forest boundaries, with some appeals filed against the cancellation. Issue 3: The respondent, a Divisional Forest Officer, granted licenses to the saw mills despite the court order and recommendations from the Central Empowered Committee, leading to a contempt of court charge. Issue 4: In his defense, the respondent claimed ignorance of the court order and renewal of licenses in good faith, but the State Government disputed this, stating the licenses were granted in violation of the law and previous dismissals of appeals. Issue 5: The Court found the respondent's actions in clear violation of its order, rejecting his apology and noting negligence in failing to recall licenses despite knowing of the court order, leading to a reprimand, warning, and a fine of Rs. 50,000 imposed on the respondent. Issue 6: The Court concluded that the respondent's actions constituted contempt of court by overreaching the court order, leading to the imposed punishment as a deterrent against future violations and for environmental protection.
|
