This writ application has been filed by the Secretary, Garo Hills, Member Contractor and Veneer-cum-Saw Mill Owner Association. The grievances of the petitioner Association are: (1) Illegal and arbitrary use of power under section 44 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 and Rules 42,43 (7) (j) of the Assam General Sales Tax Rules, 1993. (2) Illegal process of demanding security deposit for each consignment from the member mills of the petitioner's Association in spite of having all valid documents and even after payment of duties. 2. It is claimed that the mills have the valid permit/permission under Rule 10 of the Transit Rules framed by the Govt of Assam under sections 40 and 41 of the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891 and the Garo Hills Forest Act, 1968. The petitioners claimed to have also the Certificate of Registration issued under the Meghalaya Purchase Act read with Rule 39 for purchasing logs after payment of royalty as per Meghalaya Govt Schedule. They also claimed to have the Certificate of Registration issued under the Central Sales Tax Act (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957 for carrying out the inter-State sale of their manufactured goods. The member mills of the Association of the petitioner in course of its business of sale of commercial veneer is to transport the same by truck, etc from its factory and deliver the same to the plywood factories of its customers situated in various places of the country. While transporting the veneer for delivery to its various customers it has to cross a number of check posts in Meghalaya as well as in Assam. The first check post is at Kabaitari check post and the last check post is Srirampur or Boxirhat check post. Though the member mills of the petitioner's Association have all the valid certificates, the Superintendent of Taxes, Kabaitari check post while issuing Transit Pass insists on depositing security deposit at the rate of 10% of the value of the goods carried by the truck which the member Mills are depositing under compulsion. The respondent No.3, ie the Superintendent of Taxes, Kabaitari Check Post directed the member mills to get the Transit Pass counter signed at the last check gate either at Srirampur or Boxirhat and when the said counter signed Transit Pass is shown at Kabaitari check post, the security deposit is released/refunded. The respondent No.3, ie the Superintendent of Taxes, Kabaitari Check Post directed the member mills to get the Transit Pass counter signed at the last check gate either at Srirampur or Boxirhat and when the said counter signed Transit Pass is shown at Kabaitari check post, the security deposit is released/refunded. This has caused harassment to the petitioners and as such the petitioners pray that a Mandamus may be issued to stop this illegal process of demanding/obtaining security deposit from the member mills of the petitioner's Association for the consignment transported/ transhipped by them when they are found carrying properly accounted goods with valid documents, namely valid Transit Pass, Bill, Challan and other documents. 3. Affidavit-in-opposition has been filed. But the original copy is not there. A copy is now furnished by Mr. Choudhury and the same is kept on record. In the affidavit-in-opposition it is stated as follows : "Under section 46 (15) of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 and Rule 43 (7) (j) when a goods vehicle coming from any place outside the State of Assam and bound for any place outside Assam but merely passes through the State of Assam the person in charge of such vehicle is required to apply to and obtain a transit pass in Form XXV from the Officer In-charge of the entry check gate and is required to surrender/deliver one copy of such transit pass at the exit check gate in token of the fact that the consignment that was brought within Assam was actually taken out of Assam and has not been delivered or sold within Assam. In the case of failure to do so, presumption would be drawn that the goods brought in such consignment have been sold within the State of Assam and the person in charge/driver of the vehicle shall be a dealer within the meaning of clause (10) of section 2 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sodhi Transport Co vs. State of UP, (1986) 62 STC 381 (SC) held that the provisions relating to the issuance of Transit Pass contained in section 28B of the UP Sales Tax Act, 1948 is not unconstitutional as it is protected by Article 304 (b) of the Constitution. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sodhi Transport Co vs. State of UP, (1986) 62 STC 381 (SC) held that the provisions relating to the issuance of Transit Pass contained in section 28B of the UP Sales Tax Act, 1948 is not unconstitutional as it is protected by Article 304 (b) of the Constitution. "To prevent the clandestine selling of the goods in the State, so covered by transit pass and to check the possible evasion of tax, security to the extent of tax element is realised at the entry check gate in the form of bank guarantee/call deposit receipts as a precautionary measures. Such security is, however, released when the related transit pass, after being duly countersigned at the exit check gate, is returned to the entry check gate." In absence of such realisation of security there is every likelihood that the goods shown to be meant for other State, may be unloaded and sold within Assam, depriving the State of its legitimate dues and leaving the State with little scope for realisation of due tax. Security was collected on apprehension of evasion of taxes which could not have been prevented within realising a security which is refundable after the transit pass was countersigned by the outgoing." 4.1 have heard Mr. AS Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. HN Sarma, learned Govt Advocate for the respondents. 5. Mr. Choudhury has drawn my attention to Rule 43 (7) (j) of the Assam General Sales Tax Rules, 1993. Rule 43 of the said Rules provides for check post. Rule 43 (3) provides as follows : "(3) No person shall transport goods across or beyond a check post or barrier except after filing before the Officer In-charge of the check post, if so directed by him, the documents as referred in sub-section (2) of section 46 of the Act. Rule 43 of the said Rules provides for check post. Rule 43 (3) provides as follows : "(3) No person shall transport goods across or beyond a check post or barrier except after filing before the Officer In-charge of the check post, if so directed by him, the documents as referred in sub-section (2) of section 46 of the Act. Declarations referred to in section 46 and sub-sections (2), (4), (5) and (7) of section 46 include the bill of sale, delivery note or other documents and particulars mentioned in clause (j) of sub-rule (7) of this Rule." Section 46 (15) provides as follows: "(15) When a goods vehicle or boat coming from any place outside the State of Assam and bound for any other place outside the State and carrying the goods passes through the State, the driver or other person in charge of such vehicle or boat shall apply to and obtain a transit pass in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed from the Officer Incharge of the entry check post or barrier after his entry into the State of Assam and deliver it to the Officer In-charge of the exit check post or barrier before his exit from the State or any other officer as may be directed, failing which it shall be presumed that the goods carried thereby have been sold within the State by the owner or the person in charge of the goods vehicle or boat. When the goods carried by such goods vehicle or boat are after their entry into the State transported outside the State by any other goods vehicle or conveyance, the onus of proving that goods have actually moved out of the State shall be on the owner or person in charge of the goods vehicle or boat and all the provisions of this Act shall so fattest play be applicable as if such transporter or carrier or the driver or other person in charge of the vehicle were a dealer within the meaning of clause (10) of section 2. Explanation - In a case where a vehicle owned by a person is hired for transportation of goods by some other person, the hirer of the vehicle shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be the owner of the vehicle." In order to comply with this provision the security is taken by the officer at the check gate and it can not be said that this is illegal and/or violation of law. The validity of this Act was challenged and this Court in (1997) 2 GLR 477 (Federation of Industries North Eastern Region & another v. State of Assam & another) has held this Act to be valid and this Court found that section 46 was enacted with a view to check and prevent evasion of sales tax. It was further pointed out by this Court that in order to enforce section it became necessary by implication of the authority to use all reasonable means to make such grant effective. It was pointed out by this Court that section 46 is essentially a mechanism for making the legislative measure effective. Section 46 is an economic move to plug evasion of tax payable under the Act. Fiscal adjustment are inherently complex in nature, therefore, larger latitude are to be given to the Legislature in the matter of formulating he economic measure. In that view of the matter I do not find that the realisation of security amount to be arbitrary, capricious or whimsical. It has been done only as a caution against evasion of tax. Security is refunded as soon as the transit pass duly countersigned at the last check post is presented in the first check post. If that is not so done as pointed out in the affidavit-in-opposition these goods may be sold in Assam itself. If no security is taken, in case of evasion of taxes, there is no way of recovering loss of taxes, resulting in loss of revenue to the Govt. 6. In view of the above discussion. I do not find any merit in this writ application and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, I make it clear that the authority will not resort to undue harassment. No costs.