50 in respect thereof and had filed an affidavit before the Board of Revenue that a mistake had been companymitted by his labourers in companylecting some broken and fallen green trees in his absence.
From the appellate order of the Board of Revenue which was .quashed by the High Court, it appears that a Forest Beat Officer of Dibru Reserve had detected that Hazarika had illegally felled some green trees and companyverted them into firewood although under the agreement between him and the authorities he was only entitled to cut and companylect firewood from dead and fallen trees.
This settlement was challenged in appeal before the Board of Revenue.
226 of the Constitution of India.
It was observed by the Board, forest mahals and excise shops are settled under different sets of rules and the fact that the respondent Hazarika was companysidered suitable for one would number automatically entitle him to the other.
The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows.
208 of 1964.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated November 24, 1964 of the Assam and Nagaland High Court in Civil Rule No.
Biswabahan went to the Assam High Court with a writ petition and succeeded there on the ground that the evidence of the Inspector had been taken behind his back and as such should number have been taken into companysideration, but the High Court also held in that matter that numberuseful purpose would be served by granting any relief to Biswabahan at that late stage when the period of the licence was about to expire.
On appeal to the Board of Revenue, this was set aside, on the basis of a report submitted by the Inspector of Excise and the shop was settled with the present respondent.
This had the result that Hazarika remained the lessee of the shop when a fresh settlement became due.
The Board was number satisfied with this explanation and took the view that the fact of Hazarika having companypounded the offence did number clear his companyduct although he had succeeded in getting a sub sequent settlement of a forest mahal.
There was numberdispute that Hazarika had paid companypensation of Rs.
The Board went into the question as to whether Hazarika was a suitable person because as the holder of a firewood mahal licence he had companypounded an offence of illegally felling green trees by paying Rs.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
One Biswabahan Das, the appellant before us, was the lessee of the said shop from 1956 to 1962.
50 when he was acting as a forest companytractor.
Sarjoo Prasad, H.Goswami and D. N. Mukherjee, for the appellant.
94 of 1966.
208 of 1964 under Art.
The shop was settled with him again for the term 1962 64 by the Deputy Commissioner.
Gopalakrishnan, for respondent No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Mitter,J.This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment and order of the High Court of Assam and Nagaland dated January 24, 1964 passed in Civil Rule No.
