(1.) This writ appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.6.96 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Rule No. 1609 of 1990, thereby dismissing the writ petition.
(2.) Heard Mr. A.K. Maheswari, learned counsel for the appellant as also the learned Govt Advocate for the respondent-State. The appellant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the business of manufacture of sawn timber, veneer and plywood. The petition was filed by the appellant company challenging the ban imposed by the respondents for sale and dispatch of veneer from outside the State of Arunanchal Pradesh and praying for quashing of letter dated 23.9.89 (Annexure 7) thereby refusing to issue Transpit Pass for supply of veneer outside the State, and letter dated 5.1.89 which reads as follows:
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the ban imposed interferes with the petitioner's right of carrying on business as guaranteed under Art. 19 of the Constitution. It is discriminatory in the sense that other units are allowed to sale veneers outside the State, the petitioner company is refused to issue TP. The learned Single Judge by the impugned order held that the action taken by the respondents is nothing but a regulatory measure for development and growth of industry, it is not a restriction on trade as contended by the petitioner appellant. It was argued that the respondents-State having agreed to allow the appellant to sale and dispatch veneer outside the State, as per agreement Annexure 5, was estopped from prohibiting the appellant company from sale and dispatch of veneer outside the State.