2025:HHC:11328 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 6820 of 2025 Decided on: 28.04.2025 Baljinder Singh … Petitioner Versus State of HP and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 _____________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. N.K. Thakur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Divya Raj Singh, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Addl. AG for respondents-State. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Notice. Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at this stage itself. 3. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “It is therefore, respectfully prayed that the present petition may very kindly be allowed and the respondent be commanded with a writ of Mandamus, to accord the permission/sanction for converting the traditional Katha Bhatti to be up-grade with I.B.R. Bhatti. Any such or further 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:11328 order which the Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper.” 4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that there is in force in the State of Himachal Pradesh, ‘the Himachal Pradesh (Sale of Timber) Act, 1968’. Realizing that the traditional Katha Bhattis were causing pollution and to promote technical upgradation thereof so that environmental could be saved, a notification was issued by the Government on 29.04.2008, to the effect that the traditional Katha Bhattis be converted to Bhattis with IBR Boilers. The petitioner, who is a Forest Contractor, had purchased traditional Katha Bhatti, from one Sh. Vijay Singh. After following due process, had completed all the formalities of converting the traditional Katha Bhatti to one with IBR Boiler. His grievance is that despite his case being forwarded to run the same, no action is being taken upon the same till date. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that in terms of Annexure P-4, dated 22.03.2025, a similarly situated person was also granted the permission by the Authority i.e. the Divisional Forest Officer, Nurpur Forest Division, Nurpur, to run the Bhatti and interest of justice would be served, in case, said respondent is directed to take a call on the application of the petitioner within a time bound period in light of Annexure P-4. 5. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that needful will be done within a period of four weeks from today. 3 2025:HHC:11328 6. In light of respective submissions of the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that let the case of the petitioner for the grant of permission/sanction for converting the traditional Katha Bhatti to a Bhatti with IBR Boiler be decided by the Authority within a period of four weeks from today and the factum of such permission having been granted vide Annexure P-4, as has been submitted by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, be taken into consideration by the Authority while deciding the case of the petitioner. It goes without saying that before passing any order, the petitioner will be heard by the competent authority by issuance of due notice to him. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge April 28, 2025 (narender)