(1.) The petitioner have challenged the validity of seizure of the goods, namely, cloves and javitri. They also seek direction to the respondents to permit them to carry on trade and business in cloves, javitri and other items. The controversy in the two writ petitions being identical, they have been heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) Shorn of details, the petitioner in Cri. W.J.C. No. 419 of 1993 claims to be holder of monopoly rights for working of cloves in the State of Manipur for the period of two years effective from 23rd October, 1992. The petitioners in Cr. W.J.C. No. 474 of 1993 claim to be settles of the cloves and the Javitri Mahals in the State of Nagaland for the period of one year ending on 9th September 1992. On the basis of the settlement aforesaid, according to them, they collect articles and despatch them to different places by air or mail on payment of royalty to the respective Government, namely, Government of Manipur and Nagaland. As Manipur is not connected to other places of the country by air or rail, the goods are brought to Dimapur and then transported out. The movement of goods within and outside the State is on the basis of Transit passes granted by the officers of the Forest Department. On account of absence of direct air or rail link as aforesaid, it is said, the Manipur Government has entered into an understanding with the Nagaland Government for issue of Transit passes to cover the onward journey of the goods from Dimapur. In other words, whenever the goods are to be taken out of the State of Manipur, a Transit pass is first issued by a competent authority of Manipur State and when the goods reach the State of Nagaland, the authorities of that State in lieu of the Transit passes issued by the Manipur administration issue separate Transit passes of the State of Nagaland and the goods are booked for onward journey by air or rail or by road on the basis of the Transit passes so issued by the authorities of the Nagaland Government.
(3.) The petitioners have given details of Transit passes and bookings etc. relating to the impugned consignments of goods, which are not necessary to be stated for the purpose of this case. It may only be stated that the goods were detained and later seized by the Customs authorities, at Barauni Railway Station. The details of their detention and seizure will be mentioned later at the appropriate place in this judgment. The petitioners made representation. Their claim was supported by the Government of Manipur and Nagaland and but the goods were not released and, in the circumstances, the writ petitions were filed on 6th July, 1994 and 26th July, 1993.