JUDGMENT

RANGANATH MISRA, J.:— These are three petitions under Art.32 of the Constitution by three different groups of petitioners. In each of these writ petitions petitioner No. 1 is a private limited company and the second petitioner is a shareholder thereof. The petitioner-company in each of these cases obtained the right to collect oleo resin gum or to process the same for industrial purposes from the State of Jammu & Kashmir and each of them seeks to challenge the vires of the provisions of the Jammu & Kashmir Extraction of Resin Act (7 of 1986) (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

2. Though there are some variations of facts relevant to each of the writ petitions, the allegations are more or less similar in regard to the relevant contentions - both factual and legal. When rule was issued the respondent- State came with almost the same plea, traversing. common grounds and revealing a common stand in its returns to the Court. These three writ petitions were heard at a time and are now being disposed of by a common judgment.

3. Resin is the secretion extracted by tapping or otherwise from chir, chil, and kail trees wildly growing in the forests of Jammu & Kashmir. It is an exuda