HAMID RAZA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
LAWS(SC)-1959-2-10
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on February 09,1959

HAMID RAZA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The petitioner Hamid Raza has moved this Court under Art. 32 of the Constitution. Previous to this the petitioner had obtained a certificate of fitness from the Judicial Commissioner of Vindhya Pradesh on 4-1-1956 to appeal against the order dated 7-5-1955 passed on writ application No. 25 of 1955. Though the petitioner deposited the amount of security, as well as the printing charges; he took recourse to Art. 32, as a more expeditious and adequate remedy.
(2.) The petitioner carries on business as a manufacturer of bidis under the name and style of Hamid Raza Manufacturing Company Rewa. In the year 1953, the Vindhya Pradesh Tendu Leaves Act, 1953, was enacted and it came into force on May 19, 1954. In pursuance of a provision therefor the petitioner applied to the appropriate authority on January 19, 1955, for a licence. His application is Annexure 'A'. On February 4, 1955, the Divisional Forest Officer, Rewa, declined to grant him a licence stating as the reason therefor as follows : "With reference to your above application I have to inform you that no licence for Tendu Patti, will be issued as the Tendu Patti of this division were auctioned." A week later the petitioner made a second application for licence. He also interviewed the Divisional Forest Officer and the Chief Conservator of Forest Vindhya Pradesh, Rewa. Though he heard nothing in reply to his application, it appears that he was informed orally that no licence would be granted to him.
(3.) The petitioner thereupon applied to the Judicial Commissioner, Vindhya Pradesh Art. 226 of the Constitution requesting for writ or writs to compel the grant of licence to him. Before the Judicial Commissioner the authorities made an offer, and undertook, to grant to the petitioner a licence to purchase Tendu leaves from the contractors to whom the forest areas in Vindhya Pradesh had previously been auctioned. Though the petitioner did not accept this offer, the Judicial Commissioner considered it fair enough and in view of it he declined to issue a writ and dismissed the petition. As previously stated the Judicial Commissioner, Vindhya Pradesh, granted a certificate of fitness on which action was also taken, but the petitioner moved this Court under Art. 32 of the Constitution separately.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.