(1) THE appellants-petitioners sought a declaration from the High court that Rules 1-A(3(b), 2, 3(ii) and 7(4 of the Tamil Nadu Timber Transit Rules, 1968 (the Rules) were void, unconstitutional and as such unenforceable against the appellants-petitioners. The Rules have been framed by the State government under S. 35 and 36 of the Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882. A division bench of the High court by its judgment dated 14/6/1984 dismissed the bunch-petitions rejecting all the points raised by the petitioners. These appeals by way of special leave are against the judgment of the High court.

(2) THE legality of the Rules was challenged before the High court on the following grounds:

(I) The impugned rules were beyond the rule-making power of the State government under S. 35 and 36 of the Act.

(II) The Rules impose an unreasonable restriction on the fundamental rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Article 19(i)(g) of the Constitution of India.

(III) The Rules obstruct the trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the territory of India and as such were violative of Articles 301-304 of the Constitution of India.

(IV) That the increase in fees for grant o