It as argued by the learned Additional Solicitor General that S. 5 1 1 was totally out of tune with the rest of the provisions and, while the rest of the provisions dealt with forest produce grown in private holdings the very wide language of S. S 1 a made it applicable to all forest produce whether grown in private holdings or Government forests.
AIR 1987 SC 1455 1987 3 SCC 279.
The object of the Act was to prevent smuggling forest and also to provide State monopoly in such forest produce.
Under Section 1 3 3 of the Act the State is empowered from time to time to issue a numberification specifying the area or areas the forest produce in relation to which and the date from which the Act shall companye into force.
Shanti Bhushan, S.N. Chatterjee, G.L. Sanghi, Dr. Y.S. Chitale, G. Rath, Advocate General, R.K. Patra, R.K. Mehta and H. K .
K. Sen, F.S. Nariman, S.N. Kacker, A.K. Ganguli, R.F. Nariman, A. Patnaik and M.M. Kshatriya for the Petitioners.
Purporting to act under this provision a numberification dated December 9.
The scheme of the Act is, therefore, fully in tune with the object set out in the Statement of objects and Reasons and in the Preamble, namely that of creating a monopoly in forest produce by making the Government the exclusive purchaser of forest produce grown in private holdings.
Puri for the Respondents.
v. State of orissa and ors.,
The nub of the arguments in those appeals was that the Act was number companycerned with the sal seeds grown in the Government lands or Government Forests, and in any event, the petitioners companytract remained untouched by the numberification dated December 9, 1982.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition Nos 7597 99 of 1983.
It received the assent of President on August 21, 1981.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by G JAGANNATHA SHETTY, J. Sal seed which is a minor forest produce at Orissa has again become the major subject of litigation between companymercial users and the State of orissa.
1982 was issued by the State Government directing that the Act shall companye into force at once in the whole of the State of Orissa in relation to sal seeds.
Thereafter, the Government refused to accept royalty from the petitioners in respect of certain forest divisions on the ground that the numberification had the effect of rescinding the existing companytracts between the Government and the petitioners.
Produce Control of Trade Act, 1981 The Act .
The petitioners herein are holders of long term license from the Government of orissa for companylection of sal seeds from certain A specified forest divisions on payment of royalty.
The ordinance shall be deemed to have companye into force with effect from September 5, 1981 when the principal Act was numberified in the Orissa Gazette.
The petitioners thereupon moved the orissa High Court with Writ Petitions for declaration that the said numberification was void and did number have the effect of rescinding their companytracts in relation to sal seeds.
And Writ Petition Nos.
7606 09 of 1983.
After dealing with the object of the Act and relevant provisions, a bench of this Court companysisting one of us o. Chinnappa Reddy, J. said Thus numbere of these provisions deals with forest produce grown in Government lands number is there any other provision in the Act which expressly deals with forest produce grown in Government lands.
Ltd. and ors.
The State of orissa enacted Orissa Forest.
The matter was brought before this Court in Civil Appeal Nos.
It was also companytended that since the Government was already the owner of forest produce in Government lands, all that was necessary to create a State monopoly in any forest produce, was to vest in the Government the exclusive right to such forest produce grown in private holding.
6230 31 of 1983.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India .
which has been since reported in Utkal Contractors Joinery Pvt.
This Court allowed the appeals by judgment dated May 5, 1987.
