Patna High Court
M/s Jaiswal Wooden IndustriesversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition was dismissed because it was voluntarily withdrawn by the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, M/s Jaiswal Wooden Industries, filed a writ petition seeking mandamus directing the State Level Committee for Wood-Based Industries to dispose of its representation for renewal of License No. 338 of 1998, and to restrain any transfer of the license to a third party and interference with its saw‑mill operations. The petition also sought other appropriate directions. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Vinay Mistry, subsequently moved that the petition be withdrawn. The Court considered the withdrawal request and found no need to entertain the substantive reliefs. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether the State Level Committee for Wood-Based Industries should be directed to dispose of the petitioner’s representation for license renewal
- Whether the authorities should be restrained from transferring License No. 338 of 1998 to a third party
- Whether the authorities should be restrained from interfering with the operation of the petitioner’s saw‑mill
Subjects
- mandamus
- license renewal
- environment law
- wood-based industries
- withdrawal of petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2536 of 2026
======================================================
M/s Jaiswal Wooden Industries Majorganj, Riga, P.S.- Riga, District-
Sitamarhi a proprietorship firm through its Proprietor Sukh Sagar Gupta, aged
about 64 years- Male, son of Rajendra Gupta, Resident of Ward No. 01, Riga,
P.O.-Riga, P.S.-Riga, District- Sitamahri 443327.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of
Environment and Forest, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The State Level Committee for Wood-Based Industries, Bihar-Cum-
Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Licensing Officer-Cum- Divisional Forest Officer, Sitamarhi Forest
Division, Sitamarhi.
4. Sri Raj Kapoor Gupta, son of Late Rajendra Prasad Gupta, Resident of Ward
No. 01, Riga, P.O. and P.S.- Riga, District- Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinay Mistry, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Government Pleader (20)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) for issuance of a writ in the nature of
mandamus directing the Respondent No.2-State
Level Committee for Wood-Based Industries,
Bihar to dispose of the representation of the
petitioner dated 15.05.2025 (Annexure-P-4)
requesting therein to grant approval to the
Licensing Officer-Cum-Divisional Forest Officer,
Sitamarhi Forest Division, Sitamarhi to
Patna High Court CWJC No.2536 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
transfer/renewal of License No. 338 of 1998 on
the basis of "Sale" in terms of the Bihar Wood-
Based Industries (Establishment & Regulation)
Act, 2025 and the aforesaid representation is still
pending for consideration before the State Level
Committee for Wood-Based Industries, Bihar,
Patna.
(ii) for issuance of a writ in the nature
of mandamus directing the Respondent
authorities not to transfer license No.338 of
1998 in favour of 3rd party till such time the
matter is decided by the SLC in the facts and
circumstances of this case.
(iii) for issuance of a writ in the nature
of mandamus directing the respondent
authorities not to interfere with the operation of
saw mill in the facts and circumstances of the
case.
(iv) for issuance of other writ (s),
order(s), direction(s) as your Lordships may
deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.2536 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
3. Mr. Vinay Mistry, learned counsel for the petitioner
prays for withdrawal of the petition.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as
withdrawn.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…