( 1 ) THE vires of sub-rule (9) of Rule 5 of A. P. Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1970 inserted by G. O. Ms. No. 87, Environment, Forests, Science and Technology (For III) dated 5-7-1999 is questioned in these Writ Petitions.

( 2 ) THE petitioners herein are retail timber merchants engaged in the trade of purchase of timber and conduct of retail sale of timber in Rangareddy and Hyderabad districts. The Government of Andhra Pradesh in exercise of the power conferred under Section 68 of A. P. Forest Act, 1967 (for short the Act) has framed rules known as A. P. Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1970 (for short the Rules ). Rule 5 of the said rule provides for issuance of a permit in respect of forest produce to be removed from forest or Government Timber Depots in Form I and Form II. By reason of the amendment issued in G. O. Ms. No. 87 dated 5-7-1999, sub-rule (9) and (10) were inserted in Rule 5 purporting to require that the saw mill owner or depot owner trading in Municipalities and Municipal Corporation areas where the saw mills or depots are situated should issue delivery challan in Form No. IV along with the forest produce sold and Form IV should be maintained for certification of the Forest Officers.

( 3 ) MR. Venkataramana, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submit that the restriction which is sought to be imposed on the depot owners is being restricted to the timber deposits situate in municipal and municipal corporations and the same is ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India. No reasonable purpose, submits the learned counsel, would be achieved by insertion of the said provision. In any event, contends the learned counsel, the said restriction is wholly unworkable and impracticable and thus void for uncertainty. According to the learned counsel, if such restriction had been issued for the purpose of curbing of illegal transit of the forest produce, even the timber depots situated in Gram Panchayats should have also been put to such restriction. Some of the municipalities or municipal corporations may be nearer to forest but many of the municipalties are far away from forest and thus it is not at all understandable as to how sub-rule (9) of Rule 5 may be made applicable to the saw-mill situated within the municipalities or municipal corporations. Timber, according to the learned counsel, is not a controlled item.

( 4 ) A somewhat peculiar stand had been taken in the counter-affidavit. The formats for Forms II and IV had been issued after series of deliberations with Timber Merchants Federations. It is stated : since the utility of sawn timber in timber depots situated in Gram Panchayat is less compared to the consumers in Municipalities/municipal Corporations, Form II is prescribed for both sawn sizes and round timber in the Gram Panchayats. Thus, the delivery Challan (Form IV) has been introduced to take care of source of material and name and address of purchaser for retail sale of sizes only under intimation to the Forest Range Officer and Divisional Forest Officer. As per the representation made by the A. P. Timber Merchants, Saw Millers and Allied Industries Federations the procedure of issue of Form II permits for sawn sizes in Municipalities/municipal Corporations which are large consumers of sawn sizes is dispensed with and saw mill owners can issue delivery challan in the Form IV instead of permit under Form II. The format is prescribed (Form IV) and that will help in streamlining the procedure of issue of delivery challans in lie of Form II permits in Municipality/municipal Corporation areas, which are large consumption centers for sawn timber. But round timber cannot be transported on the Form IV (Delivery challan ). Thus, it is manifest that the form of Form IV is the alternatives/substitution of Form II issued by the Saw Mill owners in Municipality and Municipal Corporations.

( 5 ) SUB-SECTION (1) of Section 68 of the Act reads as follows : power of the Gover