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

1977 Supreme(Cal) 315

SUDHAMAY BASU
MOHANLAL GANGULLY – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
NIGAM CHAKRAVARTY, R.N.Mitra, Ranen Mitra, SAMAR RUDRA

SUDHAMAY BASU, J.

( 1 ) THIS Rule was obtained by the six petitioners for cancellation and recall of some orders and notifications which are annexures B and C to the petition.

( 2 ) THE petitioners carry on trade in timber and forest-produce and operate 100 boats of different length, breadth and depth and ply them in the canals and rivers of the State of West Bengal. Principally, it is alleged, they carry timber and other forest-produce to and from the reserved and protected forests of Sunderbans in 24-Parganas. In exercise of powers conferred under the Indian Forest Act, 1and27 and in particular Sections 32 and 41 rules have been framed for the control of transit of timber and other forest produce which are known as the West Bengal Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1956. Rule 9 provides that no forest produce shall be brought to, or removed from, any depot in the Sunder-ban Forest Division except in a boat which has been registered by an Officer-in-Charge of a Forest Revenue or Checking Station described in Rule IV or under any other Rules or Act for the time toeing in force and which bears its registered number and marks on a conspicuous place on its bows. Rule 15 provides for pena











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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top