KARTIKA GWALA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two writ petitions, the question of law involved being similar, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment.

(2.) In both the writ petitions, the vires of Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 (the Act) has been challanged. At the time of hearing of the writ petitions, Dr. Debi Pal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that at this stage it was not necessary to challenge the vires of the Act and he submitted that the only point which was necessary to be urged was that in view of the absence of notification under Section 1 (c) of the Act it does not apply either to the whole of the State of Bihar or part 0f it and consequently, no action could have been taken by the respondents under the provisions of the Act. Learned counsel for the parties were heard on thiS question alone and we are confining our judgment to this question.

(3.) The Bihar Legislature enacted the Act to provide for regulating in the public interest, the trade and other related matters of certain forest produce by creation of a State monopoly in such trade in the State of Bihar. Section 1 (c) Provides that it shall come into force in such area or area, and on such date for dates, as the Government may by notification in the official Gazette specify and they may specify different dates for different areas. Section 1 (d) provides that it shall apply to such forest produce and on such date or dates as the Government, by notification, may specity in that behalf.