No tenders were received for units 5 and 1 1 but there was a tender for unit 3.
A Divisional Bench of this Court held that companytracts and agreements, such as the one held by the petitioner firm, were in essence and effect licenses granted to the transferees to cut, gather and carry away, the produce in the shape of tends leaves, lac, or timber or wood.
K. Daphtary, Attorney General, B. Sen, M. N. Shroff, and I. N. Shroff, for the respondents Nos.
By numberification the State of Madhya Pradesh, declared the areas to which the Adhiniyam extended and subdivided the area into units.
S. Pathak, P. R. Naolekar, J. B. Dadachanji, O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the petitioner.
1 of 1951 was passed.
Holding further that there was numberhing in the Abolition Act to affect their validity or to extinguish such rights in favour of the State, the Divisional Bench ruled that the State had numberright to interfere with the rights under the companytracts and agreements.
The Imlai Estate, in respect of which the petitioner firm held its agreement, was divided up into unit No.
For the present we must follow up the narrative of events.
11 Umaria leased area.
The State Government then invited tenders for the areas including the three units but the remarks companyumn showed that these units were leased by the Malguzar to the petitioner firm up to the year 1973.
In 1950 the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Estates, Mahals and Alienated Lands Act No.
1 to 4.
On March 20, 1965 the Minister for Forests in a meeting, informed the representatives of the petitioner firm that their leases stood extinguished by reason of the Adhiniyam and that time was extended for submission of fresh tenders in respect of the units left out.
32 of the Constitution to enforce what they des cribed as fundamental rights to property, and asked for writs or orders to restrain the State Government from enforcing the Abolition Act generally and in particular so as to interfere with the right of the petitioner firm to pick, gather and carry away the kind of forest produce for which they held agreements.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hidayatullah, J. The petitioner is a partnership firm which manufactures and sells, bidis, under the name and style of Anwarkhan Mehboob and Co., Jabalpur.
309 of 1951 Firm Anwar Khan Mehboob Co. v. State of Madhya Pradesh , and were decided on December 23, 1952.
9,000 per year which must be paid after each tendu leaf crop is over but before the expiry of three months, that only the leaves should be plucked and that numberbushes should be cut down.
Under the Act ,which may be briefly called the Abolition Act all rights,.
A dozen such petitions were heard together, that of the petitioner being W. P. No.
3 Baghraji leased area, unit No.
ceased and vested in the State for purposes of State, free from all encumbrances.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.
The main judgment of this Court was pronounced in a petition filed by one Chhotabhai Jethabhai and is reported in Chhotabhai Jethabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh 1 .
5 Kundam leased area, and unit No.
title and interest vesting in the proprietor or any person having interest in such proprietary right through the pro prietor, in an area to which the Abolition Act was extended including land cultivable or barren , grass land, scrub jungle forest, trees etc.,
In 1948 the petitioner firm, with a view to securing a supply of tendu leaves over the years acquired for a term of 25 years, the right to pluck and carry away tendu leaves from plants in ninety nine villages in the former Imlai Estate from the Malguzar Raja Raghuraj Singh.
Pursuant to the provisions of the Adhiniyam, the State Government set up Advisory Committees under the Madhya Pradesh Tendu Patta Mantrana Samiti Mulya Prakashan Niyam, 1964 and framed rules called Madhya Pradesh Tendu Patta Vyapar Viniyaman Niyamavali, 1965.
The period of 25 years was to run from 1948 to 1973.
38 of 1965.
The document, which was number registered annexure I , was executed by the Raja on August 22, 1948.
The Government of Madhya Pradesh obstructed the persons who held companytracts for tendu leaves Jac, wood, timber or other forest produce, including the petitioner firm, The petitioner firm and many others petitioned to this Court under Art.
32 of the Constitution of India for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
Petition under Art.
On March 23, 1965 tenders made by two persons in respect of unit 3 Baghraji and unit 11 Umaria were accepted and the Next day the petitioner firm was informed, by letter from the Divisional Forest Officer, Jabalpur Division, that the right to companylect tendu leaves in all the 99 villages of Imlai Estate was abrogated by the State Government under the Adhiniyam.
