WP(C) 2953/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE I A ANSARI By filing this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, th e petitioner has sought for appropriate directions to be issued to the responden ts/authorities concerned prohibiting them from obstructing/restraining the trans portation of stone, which is carried to the petitioner’s stone-crushing unit. The petitioner’s contention is that the petitioner runs a stone-crushing unit an d though, in terms of various judicial pronouncements, forest personnel cannot i nsist on a Transit Permit/Challan if the stone is transported for crushing, the transportation of the stone, meant for the petitioner’s said stone-crushing unit , has been obstructed/restrained by the respondents/authorities concerned by dem anding Transit Permit/Challan. Heard Mr. P. J. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. G. S oren, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of respondents. It may be noted that in the case of the Divisional Forest Officer, Sout h Kamrup Division, Gauhati and Ors. Vs. Moolchand Saraugi Jain (AIR 1971 SC 694) , the Supreme Court has decided that stone is not a forest produce. Based on th e said decision, a Division Bench of this Court has held that stone is not a for est produce. It is submitted, on behalf of the petitioner, that in earlier writ petitions too, filed by some similarly situated persons, which gave rise to WP( C) 59/2008 and WP(C) No. 3485/2007, this Court, while disposing of the said writ petitions by order, dated 18.03.2008 [reported in (2008) 3 GLT 650], held that forest personnel cannot demand, or insist on, transit pass/Challan in respect of stone meant for crushing. The said decision still remains unchallenged. It is further submitted, on behalf of the petitioner, that on the sole ground that th e petitioner was not a party to the said writ petitions, the petitioner has been restrained/obstructed from carrying stone to his stone-crushing factory. The respondents have relied on the Notification, dated 27.01.2003, in su pport of their act of restraining the transportation of stone to the petitioner’ s stone-crushing unit. Considering the submissions, made on behalf of the parties, and in light of the aforementioned decisions, which have been referred to by the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the Govt. Notification, dated 27.01.2003, which has been referred to, and relied upon, by the respondents, cannot vest in the fo rest personnel the authority to demand Transit Permit/Challan in a case of prese nt nature. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, it is hereby direct ed that the respondents shall not demand Transit Permit/Challan for transportati on of stone to the factory premises of the petitioner nor shall the respondents/ authorities concerned demand Transit Permit/Challan for transpiration of crushed stones to various locations. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition shall sta nd disposed of. Furnish a copy of this order to the learned Government Advocate.