SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1987 Supreme(SC) 508

O. CHINNAPPA REDDY AND V. KHALID, JJ.
Civil Appeals Nos. 6230 and 6231 of 1983,
D/- 7-5-1987.
Utkal Contractors and Joinery Pvt. Ltd. and others, etc., Appellants
Versus
State of Orissa and others, Respondents.

Advocates:
A.K.GANGULY, ASHA PATHAK, F.S.NARIMAN, G.RAMASVAMY, M.M.KSHATRIYA, R.F.NARIMAN, R.K.MEHTA, S.N.KACKAR

Headnote:

Orissa Forest Act, 1972 - Orissa Forest Produce Act, 1981 - Section 1(3), 5(1), (1)(a), 4, 2(d), 2(c),2(h), (i), 5(2), 5(1)(b), (2)(b), 9, 10, 16, 22(1), 4, 5(1)(b), 5(3), 7, 8, 12 - Forests - License for Collection of Sal Seeds - Sale And Purchase - State granted a license for collection of Sal Seeds from eleven Forest Divisions to M/s. Utkal Contractors and Joinery Private Limited - Agreement provided for sale and purchase of Sal Seeds falling on ground naturally in forests - There was a stipulation that company should establish solvent extraction units in backward areas of Mayur Bhanj and Sambatpur - There was also all option for renewal of lease for a further period of ten years - It was later agreed that period should be treated as experimental period and lease should be deemed to have commenced to last for a period of ten years - Thereafter, agreements renewing leases for purchase and removal of sal seeds from eleven Forest Divisions for a further period of ten years were entered into by Utkal Contractors and Joinery Private Limited and Government of Orissa - This was followed up by an agreement between Utkal Contractors and Joinery Private Limited and Orissa Oil Industries Limited for supply of entire collection of sal seeds from eleven Forest Divisions by Utkal Contractors to Orissa Oil Industries - While so Orissa Forest Produce Bill 1981 was introduced in Legislative Assembly of Orissa State – Held, In view that court have taken it is unnecessary to consider further submission that Explanation II to S. 5(1) saves present contract or that Explanation II is an explanation only to S. 5(1)(a) and not to S. 5(1)(b) – Court declare that Act and notification issued under Act do not apply to forest produce grown in Government forests and that it was not, therefore, open to Government to treat contract as rescinded - As a result of attitude of Government in treating contract as rescinded from date of notification appellants were not able to collect and purchase sal seeds from Government forests which they have taken on lease for a period of about four years - Question arises whether any further relief in addition to declaration may be granted by us - It was suggested on behalf of appellants that their lease should be extended by another period of four years – Court do not think that it is permissible for us to extend lease for a further period of four years in that fashion – Court can only leave it open to parties to work out their rights in light of declaration granted – Court is not a little surprised that only occasion for using machinery of Orissa Forest Produce (Control of Trade) Act, 1981 was to issue a notification in respect of sal seeds and not in respect of other forest produce, leaving an uneasy feeling with us that notification was issued only with object of putting an end to these contracts solemnly entered into by Orissa Government for avowed purpose of encouraging setting up of certain industries in State - Allegation of appellants is that this has been done with a view to help certain industrialists outside State - Appeal Allowed.

Judgement Key Points

Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:

  • The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in a case involving Utkal Contractors and Joinery Pvt. Ltd. versus the State of Orissa regarding the validity of contracts for the collection and sale of Sal Seeds [judgement_subject] (!) (!) .
  • The State of Orissa had granted a license to Utkal Contractors to collect Sal Seeds from eleven Forest Divisions, with stipulations to establish solvent extraction units in backward areas (!) (!) .
  • The Orissa Forest Produce (Control of Trade) Bill 1981 was introduced to prevent smuggling of forest produce grown in both private holdings and Government forests, noting that Sal Seeds were grown exclusively in Government forests (!) (!) [1000277220001].
  • The Orissa Forest Produce (Control of Trade) Act, 1981 received assent in August 1981, and a notification was issued in December 1982 bringing the Act into force for Sal Seeds, which the Government claimed rescinded the existing contracts [1000277220002].
  • The Government argued that Section 5(1)(a) of the Act rescinded all contracts for the purchase, sale, gathering, or collection of specified forest produce, regardless of whether they were grown in Government or private forests [1000277220003] (!) (!) .
  • The Court observed that the Statement of Objects and Reasons explicitly stated Sal Seeds were grown only in Government forests, yet a notification was issued solely for them, raising suspicions about the Act's true intent [1000277220002][1000277220004][1000277220017].
  • The Court analyzed the definition of "grower of forest produce" and other provisions of the Act, concluding that the legislative scheme was designed to create a State monopoly by giving the Government the exclusive right to purchase forest produce from private holdings [1000277220005][1000277220014].
  • The Court held that general words in the Act must be construed in the context of its object and scheme, meaning Section 5(1) applies only to forest produce grown in private holdings, not in Government forests [1000277220008][1000277220014].
  • Consequently, the Court declared that the Act and the notification issued under it do not apply to forest produce grown in Government forests, and the Government could not treat the contract as rescinded [1000277220016].
  • While the appellants requested an extension of their lease, the Court declined to extend it directly but left it open to the parties to work out their rights in light of the declaration [1000277220016].
  • The appeal was allowed, and the Court expressed concern that the notification might have been issued merely to terminate contracts that were entered into to encourage industrial development in the State [1000277220016][1000277220017].

Judgement

CHINNAPPA REDDY, J. :- On December 12, 1967, the State of Orissa granted a license for collection of Sal Seeds from eleven Forest Divisions to M/s. Utkal Contractors and Joinery Private Limited. The agreement provided for the sale and purchase of Sal Seeds falling on the ground naturally in the forests. There was a stipulation that the company should establish solvent extraction units in the backward areas of Mayur Bhanj and Sambatpur. There was also all option for renewal of the lease for a further period of ten years. It was later agreed that the period from October 1, 1967 to September 30, 1969 should be treated as experimental period and the lease should be deemed to have commenced from October 1, 1969 and to last for a period of ten years. The Orissa Oil Industries Limited, a public limited company, was floated by the Utkal Contractors and Joinery Private Limited and it was agreed that the State Government should also contribute to the share capital of the company. It was agreed that the Utkal Contractors and Joinery Private Limited should supply Sal Seeds to the two solvent extraction plants of the Orissa Oil Industries Limited, one set up at Bairangpur in Mayurbhanj District with a capacity to crush 2 1,000 M.T. Sal Seeds and the other at Sasan in Sambalpur District with a capacity to crush 21,000 M.T. sal seeds. Thereafter on May 25, 1979, agreements renewing the leases for the purchase and removal of sal seeds from the eleven Forest Divisions for a further period of ten years from October 1, 1979 to September 30, 1989 were entered into by the Utkal Contractors and Joinery Private Limited and the Government of Orissa. This was followed up by an agreement between the Utkal Contractors and Joinery Private Limited and the Orissa Oil Industries Limited for the supply of the entire collection of sal seeds from the eleven Forest Divisions by the Utkal Contractors to the Orissa Oil Industries. While so the Orissa Forest Produce (Control of Trade) Bill 1981 was introduced in the Legislative Assembly of Orissa State. The Statement of Objects and Reasons was as follows :-

"Smuggling of various forest produces are increasing day by day. The present provisions of the Orissa Forest Act, 1972 for checking, hoarding did transport of forest produce are not adequate to bring the culprits to book. The said Act is not adequate for imposition of any restrictions of control on trade in forest produce by framing rules thereunder. Barring few items like sal seeds, most of the important items of minor forest produce such as Mahua flowers, Tamarind, Charmaji, Karanja and the like are grown in private holdings as well as in the forest areas owned by Government. Unscrupulous traders take advantage of this situation and evade the law under the cover that the produce relates to private land and not to forests under the control of Government. Instances of smuggling in such cases are too many and the smugglers are escaping with impunity because of absence of any legislation providing for State monopoly in forest produce. Enactment of a separate legislation for the purpose is, therefore, absolutely necessary.

The Bill seeks to achieve the above purpose."

2. It appears from a perusal of the Statement of Objects and Reasons that the object of the proposed Act was to prevent smuggling of forest produce like Mahua flowers, Tamarind, Charmaji, Karanja, etc. which were grown both in private holdings and Government forests. The object of the legislation was to prevent smuggling in such forest produce and to provide for State monopoly therein. It is seen that the Statement of Objects and Reasons expressly mentions sal seeds as a forest produce which is grown in Government Forests and not in private holdings.

3. The Orissa Forest Produce (Control of Trade) Act, 1981 received the assent of the President of India on August 21, 1981. Under S. 1(3) of the Act, the State Government is empowered from time to time to issue a notification specifying the area or








































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top