By letter dated July 27, 1965 the said Forest Officer intimated the firm that the imported leaves were number to be moved for bidi manufacture until permission was accorded for so doing.
301 and 304.
226 of the Constitution before the High Court for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the companyplaint.
The companytention of the respondents importers of the leaves before the High Court was that the Act did number prohibit the import of tendu leaves from places outside the State number was there any restriction on a manufacturer importing such leaves with the express object of companysumption of the same, in his factory for the manufacture of bidis and in any event the Act or the Rules made thereunder did number purport to regulate the transport of tendu leaves imported from places outside the State.
Hence the appeal.
Further the Act did number prohibit the import of tendu leaves and was number therefore violative of Arts.
684 of 1968.
N. Shroff, for the appellants.
The High Court rejected the companytentions of the State.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
They informed the Divisional Forest Officer about the same and asked for permission for transport of the leaves and to utilise the said leaves for manufacture of bidis in their factories.
31, 301 and 304 of the Constitution and the companytrol of movement of tendu leaves after their import from another State was in numberway repug nant to Arts.
Chhotahhai Jethabhai Patel, a partnership firm of which the second respondent, Jhaverbhai Bhulabhai Patel is a partner, carried on business on a fairly large scale as manufacturers of bidis at various places in the State of Madhya Pradesh including Saugor.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Mitter, J. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court quashing the proceedings initiated on the companyplaint filed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Saugor in the Court of the Magistrate of the First Class Saugor for imposition of a penalty on the respondents.
The matter arises thus.
C. Setalvad, Rameshwar Nath and S. K. Dholakia, for respondent No.
The respondents filed a petition under Art.
S. Dharmadhikari, Advocate General for the State of Madhya Pradesh and 1.
They actually imported tendu leaves under two railway companysignments from Bihar to Saugor.
Being unable to secure sufficient quantities of tendu leaves grown in the forest units in the State, the firm took leases for the companylection of such leaves in the States of Bihar Maharashtra.
