K. B. SIDDAPPA, J.

( 1 ) PETITIONERS in these writ petitions are the Saw-mill and timber Depot owners within the municipal limits of Rajahmundry, Kakinada and nizamabad. They are seeking directions in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to insist for transit permits within the municipal limits. They pray to implement the Memo. No. 13941/for. III/94-1, dated 5-9-1994 issued by the Special Secretary to the Government, Energy and Forest department, Government of Andhra Pradesh which (it is said) is kept in abeyance, according to the Government.

( 2 ) IT is submitted that the insistence of transit permits within the municipal limits is causing great hardship and injury to the petitioners. Even for routine and small consignments of sawn sizes for house-hold purposes permits are being demanded by the Officials. The procedural delay and the incidental expenditure involved in getting the transit permits for retail sales to the consumers is causing great inconvenience to the customers and has proved deterrent to their business itself. The hole/round timber (unsawn) is covered by transit permits when the said timber was transported from government depots and also from the farms of the private owners. In such a case it is contended that the further insistence of transit permit when the timber was converted into sizes and sold to the consumers within the municipal limits works out great hardship and unnecessary restriction. The sawn sizes when sold to consumers will be covered by delivery challan and cash memo. The authorities can satisfy themselves, on perusal of these documents in the possession of the consumers, as to the genuineness of the source of timber. Further, the authorities are not implementing this policy of requiring the transit permit within all the municipal limits uniformly. For example, the authorities are not insisting on transit permits in a place like Ravulapalem, and for that matter even in Hyderabad Municipal Corporation limits and other places. There are no perceptible reasons for this discriminatory attitude on the part of the forest authorities. As a matter of fact, representations were made to the authorities and Special Secretary to the government, Energy and Forest Department has passed a Memo not to insist for transit permits when the sawn timber is transported within the municipal limits. The subsequent action of keeping this Memo in abeyance is unwarranted and is causing great hardship both to the petitioners and to the consumers. It is their plea that the insistence of transit permits within the municipal limits works out as a control order on the trade of timber. As such, the action/restriction is not authorised under the provisions of the A. P. Forest Act. Thus, the impugned action of the forest authorities is said to be violative of Articles 14, 19 (l) (g), 21 and 301 of the Constitution of india as it works out unreasonable restriction to the trade of the petitioners. Therefore, the forest authorities are to be directed not to insist for transit permits within the municipal limits.

( 3 ) ON the above points, the stand of the government is stoic. The learned Government pleader submitted that the A. P. Forest produce Transit Rules are framed in exercise of powers conferred by Section 29, read with sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the A. P. Forest act. The timber sawn sizes and the timber cut in the saw-mills are also a forest produce within the meaning of Section 2 (g) of the a. P. Forest Act. Therefore, as per Rule 3, no forest produce shall be moved into, or from or within the State, by land or water, unless such produce is accompanied by the permit issued under Rule 5 of the A. P. Forest produce Transit Rules. The municipal limits in question are also within the State of Andhra pradesh. Therefore, by necessary implication, the petitioners have to obtain transit permits for transport of timber, sawn sizes etc. The memo relaxing this requirement was kept in abeyance pending amen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document