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

1983 Supreme(Ori) 63

P.K.MOHANTY, B.K.BEHERA
ROYAKA MANGULU – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
C.A.RAO, C.M.K.MURTY, C.V.MURTHY, D.P.MOHAPATRA, Debabrata Das

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

















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