- (1.) Heard counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner No. 1 is an Association of Minor Mineral Lease Holders of Sonebhadra district, and the other petitioners are its members. They have challenged the validity of the U. P. Transit of Timber and other Forest Produce Rules, 1978. The validity of the Rules has been upheld by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of U. P. and Ors. v. Sitapur Packing Wood Suppliers etc. JT 2002 (4) SC 341.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the U. P, Transit of Timber Rules will not apply to a Minor Mineral as it is not a forest produce. In this connection, Section 2 (4) (b) (iv) of the Forest Act states that forest produce includes minerals (including lime-stone, laterite, mineral oils, and all products of mines or quarries) which are found in or brought from a forest. It follows that If the minor mineral excavated was not found in or brought from a forest as defined under the Forest Act, no transit fee can be charged from the petitioners.;