The Court held that the Bihar Timber and other Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1973 (the Rules) are not violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, as they are regulatory in nature and are enacted to effectuate the policy of the Forest Act, which is to control the illegal felling and removal of forest produce.

NAGENDRA RAI, J.

1. The petitioners have filed the writ application for quashing the notification of the State Government dated 9-10-1996, a copy of which has been annexed As Annexure-4 to the writ application, by which sub-rule 3 of Rule 3 of the Bihar Timber and other Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Transit Rules) has been deleted wherein exemption with regard to 10 varieties of timber from operation of Transit Rules was given and for a direction restraining the respondents from acting pursuant to and in furtherance of the Transit Rules against the petitioner No. 1 and the members of the petitioner No. 1 and also to restrain them from enforcing direction contained in letter dated 18-10-96 issued by the Range Officer Timber Depots Range Ranchi (respondent No. 5). Subsequently, by an amendment petition filed on 21-11-1996 they have challenged the vires of the Transit Rules aned also sought for declaration that the Transit Rules has been impliedly repealed pursuant to enactment of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act, 1990.

2. The petitioner No. 1 is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act and is an Association of Timber Traders specially of Ranchi district. Petitioner No. 2 is its Secretary and petitioner Nos. 3 to 6 are its members. All the members of the Society carry on the business of Saw Mills and the present writ application has been filed in representative capacity. It is asserted that the State Government in exercise of power under Secs. 41, 42 and 76 of the Indian Forest Act ( hereinafter referred to as the Forest Act) framed a Transit Rule, 1973 which require permit by a competent authority for transportation of the timber and other forest produce as detailed in the said Rules. The State Government issued a notification published in the Official Gazette on 4-7-94 byy which sub-rule 3 was added after sub-rule 2 Rule 3 of Transit Rules. It also amended rules 6 and 8 of the aforesaid Transit Rules. A copy of the said notification has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ application. By virtue of the aforesaid amendment the provision of the Act was made in applicable to ten varities of timbers, namely, Aam, Imli, Jamun, Kathal, Mahua, Gramin Bas, Pipal, Bargad, Pakar and Barhar. Rules 6 and 8 were also amended. Rule 6 prescribes the Form to be filed by the private owners of the forest who wanted to transport the timber from their land. Rule 8 was also amended by which punishment prescribed earlier was enhanced. Thereafter the impugned notification has been issued deleting sub-rule 3 of Rule 3, the effect of which is that the exemption from operation of the Transit Rule to 10 varieties of timbers or trees has been withdrawn. It is asserted that the aforesaid notification contained in Annexure-4 cannot be given effect to as the same has not been published in the Official Gazette in terms of Sec. 78 of the Forest Act. It is also asserted on their behalf that the provision of the Forest Act does not apply to the timber and other forest produce grown on the raiyati lands as the same is not the forest produce as defined under the Forest Act and as such no Transit permit is required with regard to the export or import of the timber and other forest produce grown on the land of the raiyats. The Bihar Government has enacted Forest Produce (Regulations of Trade) Act, 1984 and Bihar Saw Mills (Regulations) Act, 1990 with a view to regulate the establishment and running of the Saw Mills in the State of Bihar as well as the trade in the forest produce and there is an elaboration provision under the aforesaid Acts controlling the movement of the timber and forest produce and as such the transit rules stands impliedly overruled or ceased to have any utility. It is also submitted that the Transit Rules of 1973 is violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India on the ground of substantive and procedural unreasonableness. It has put unreasonable restriction on the