P.K.MOHANTY, B.K.BEHERA
ROYAKA MANGULU – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
B. K. BEHERA, J.
( 1 ) THE three writ applications under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution have been heard analogously as agreed to by the parties and will be governed by this common judgment. Challenge is to the decision of the State Government vesting the right of collection of the tamarind and tamarind seeds from the Government Forests in the Rayagada Forest Range in the district of Koraput, in the opposite party No. 4 Shri Doki China Guruvulu Son and Company, a partnership firm represented by its Managing Partner, namely, Doki Satyanarayana, for utilization in its industry for a period of three years with effect from Oct. 1, 1981 in accordance with the State Government's Industrial Policy Resolution. The petitioners impugn this decision and the consequent orders passed for its implementation as per Annexures 3 to 5 in O. J. C. No. 67 of 1983 and Annexures 2 to 4 in the other writ applications, as illegal, invalid and inoperative in law, being in violation of Arts. 14 and 19 of the Constitution affecting adversely the right of trade of petitioners in O. J. C. Nos. 1359 and 1786 of 1982 who are said to be collectors of tamarind and also of the petitioners in O. J. C. No. 67
REFERRED TO : Peoples Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India
Hrudananda Patra v. Revenue Divisional Commr. Central Division
Fertilizer Corporation Kamagar Union (Regd) Sindri v. Union of India
Om Prakash Sud v. State of J. and K
M/s. Kasturi Lal Lakshmi Reddy v. State of J. and K.
Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India
Hrudananda Patra v. Revenue Divisional Commr. Central Division
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
Raghunandan Panda v. State of Orissa
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.