STATE OF TRIPURA AND ORS. versus SUDHIR RANJAN NATH

Citation: [1997] 2 S.C.R. 29 · Decided: 13-02-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. JEEVAN REDDY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

-
-
STATE OF TRIPURA AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
SUDHIR RANJAN NATH 
FEBRUARY 13; 1997 
(B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND SUJATA V. MANOHAR, JJ.) 
B 
Indian Forest Act, 1927: Sections 41 and 76(d). 
Tripura Transit Rules--Rule 3(8)-Timber and firewood-Quantity to 
be exported from State-To be detennined on basis of availability of forest C 
produce after catering to needs and requirements of local people of 
State-Validity of-Held: Rule 3(8) fell within the power of State Government 
under S. 41 of the Act "to regulate transit of timber and other forest 
produce''-Power to ''regulate" includes power to prohibit in the context of 
sub-role (8)-Further, sub-role (8) was not only relatable to S. 41 but also to 
S. 76(d) inasmuch as it was intended to carry out the object and purposes of D 
the Act-Hence, R. 3(8) was valid and intra-vires the Acr-Tripura Transit 
Rules, R. 3. 
Sections 41. and 76(d)-Tripura Transit Rule-Rule 3-State Govern-
ment imposed restrictions regulating transit of timber and other fore st E 
produce-Held : Rule 3 neither violative nor required to comply with proviso 
to Art. 304(b )-It is saved by Art. 302-Rule was made by the State as delegate 
of Parliament to carry out purposes of the Act-It was neither a law made by 
the State Legislature nor a role made by the State Government in its capacity 
as Government of Tripura-Hence, Rule 3 not required to comply with Art. 
304(b). 
F 
Sections 41 and 76--Tripura Transit Rules--Rule 3-Forest Act, insofar 
as Tripura State was concerned, being post-Constitutional Parliamentary 
enactment (as it had been extended to Tripura, which was then a Union 
.Territory) by Union Territory (Laws) Act, 1950, Ss. 41 and 76 thereof were G 
laws within the meaning of Art. 302-Ss. 41 and 76 thus being saved by Art. 
302, any Rule made to carry out the purposes of the said provisions or to 
elucidate the meaning and purpose of the said provisions must equally be 
protected by Art. 302. 
., 
Section 39-Tripura Transit Rules--Rule 3-Held : The expression H 
29 
30 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1997) 2 S.C.R. 
A "restrictions" in Art. 302 was not qualified by word "reasonable''-But even 
proceeding for the present purposes that the restrictions ought to be reasonable 
since Art. 302 has a close parallel with Clauses .(2) to (6) of Art. 19, the power 
to impose reasonable restrictions took the power to prohibit also in ap-
propriate situations-Hence, considering that the restrictions imposed by R. 3 
B amowtted to prohibition, it is unconstitutionaf-However, R. 3 could not have 
been s4stained by sub-sections (3) and (4) of S.39--Constitution of India, 
1950, Arts. 301 to 304. 
Sections 39, 41and76-Tripura Transit Rules-Rule 3(5}-Empowered 
State Government to levy duty for export of timber and firewood up to 100% 
C of their market value-Held: Rule 3(5) ultra vires S.41 of Forest Act. 
Sections 41 and 76(drTripura Transit Rules 3(3) a11d (4Horest 
produce-Movement of-Licence levy of-Application fee and licence fee of 
Rs. 1,000 and Rs. 2,000 respectively-Held: Such fee was regulatory fee and 
not compensatory fee for which no quid pro quo need be established-Hence, 
D Rules 3(3) and (4) valid-Constitution of India, 1950, Art. 301. 
Sections 41and76(drTripura Transit Rules-Rule 3(2)--l'rovidedfor 
licence for removal of timber or firewood from within the State to any place 
outside the State and also for establishing a trading depot within the 
E State-Held: Rule 3(2) was covered by Ss. 41and76(d}-Hence, Rules 3(3) 
and ( 4) valid. 
The Indian Forest Act, 1927 was enacted to consolidate the law 
relating to forests, the transit of forest-produce and the duty leviable on 
F 
timber and other forest-produce. The Act was extended to the then Union 
Territory of Tripura by the Union Territories (Laws) Act, 1950. It con-
tinued to.be applicable to the State of Tripura. The State Government 
framed the Tripura Transit Rules under Sections 41 and 42 of the Act. 
Rule 3 of the Transit Rules provided for levy of an application fee and 
licence fee of Rs. 1,000 and Rs. 2,000 respectively for movement of forest-
G produce. The Rule also provided that no person was permitted to establish 
a trading depot within the State without a licence. Rule 3(5) of the Rules 
levied export duty extending upto hundred percent of the market value of 
timber/firewood. 
H 
The High Court had declared that the levy of application and licence 
'
STATEv. SUDHIR RANJAN NATH 
31 
-, 
fees amounted to levy of tax and was bad. This was
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.