Judgment :- Common Order: The petitioners were all timber merchants and in the present writ petitions, they are seeking for a direction to the respondents to issue Form III permits issued under the Tamil Nadu Timber Transit Rules 1968 [for short, Timber Transit Rules] prescribed under Section 35 of the Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882. Rule 2 of the Timber Transit Rules provides for condition of the transport of timbers and Rule 3 prescribes the form of permits and Rule 4 deals with the issue of permits by the authorities and it prescribes Form I, Form II and Form III. 2. In the present case, the petitioners state that they were bringing the Silver Oak timber logs from the State of Karnataka with valid documents and transit permit issued by the Karnataka Government and while they enter into the checkposts set up by the Tamil Nadu Forest Department, permit in Form III is required. The authorities are not issuing the Form III permits since the petitioners do not carry Form II permits and in the State of Karnataka, the Silver Oak tree is exempted from the purview of the operation of the Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969 by virtue of modification dated 212. 2004. Even the State of Tamil Nadu, by G.O. (Ms.) No.216, Environment and Forest (FR-13) Department dated 07. 2004 issued under the Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 had deleted the Silver Oak tree from the list of scheduled timber. .3. In the present case, the grievance of the petitioners is that while the Karnataka Government has not prohibited the transit of timber and silver oak tree, it merely provides for a pass for transport of removal of forest process whereas when the logs are brought into the State of Karnataka, Form II permit is requested by the authorities without which the authorities are refusing to give Form III thereby preventing them from taking the timber into Tamil Nadu and the petitioners are put to grave hardship. The stand of the petitioners was that while they bring the silver oak trees from Karnataka State, the lorries which carry them also accompany the purchase bills, delivery notes, Form II permit (transport permit issued by the Karnataka Forest Department) and they are stopped at the checkpost set up by the Forest Department in Tamil Nadu and in exchange of Form II, the authorities will have to issue Form III permits. But when they bring silver oak consignment, in view of the exemption granted, no Form II transport permit is issued by the Karnataka Government. However, the petitioners should produce the original purchase bill, delivery note issued in Form 39 under the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Act, logs measurement list and local tax paid in Karnataka and a certificate issued by the Revenue authorities about the origin of the timber. Nevertheless, blindly, the respondents are stopping those lorries and are demanding Form III and, therefore, they are constrained to come forward to file the present writ petition with the prayer referred to above. 4. This Court granted interim injunction in all these writ petitions by a common order dated 210. 2006 injuncting the respondents from demanding Form II under the provisions of the Timber Transit Rules in respect of the transport of silver oak logs from the State of Karnataka in the State of Tamil Nadu pending disposal of the writ petitions. When the respondents sought for vacating the injunction granted by this court, with the consent of the parties, the main writ petitions themselves are taken up for disposal. 5. I have heard Mr.V.Radhakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Titus Jesudoss, Special Government Pleader representing the respondents and have perused the records. 6. In paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, the respondents have taken a stand that Form III permit can be given only in exchange of the permit being issued by the other States for which no fee is collected and the Silver Oak even though has been removed from the schedule of Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 and it is no longer in schedule timber, nevertheless, it continues to be timber as defined in the Timber Transit Rules. Therefore, the provisions of Timber Transit Rules will apply and the validity of the Timber Transit Rules has been upheld by the Apex Court and on receipt of application along with required particulars, Form II permits will be issued as quickly as possible and transportation of silver oak without a valid permit is a violation of the Acts and Rules which are in force. .7. This is a strange stand taken by the respondents. .7. This is a strange stand taken by the respondents. If the Karnataka Forest officials do not give Form II, for the purpose of carrying the Silver Oak timber, they cannot be expected to carry Form II so as to exchange the same with a Form III permit to be issued by the respondents. In fact, the details that are to be found in Form II and Form III are as follows: 8. It is admitted position that both in Karnataka and in Tamil Nadu silver oaks are no longer in the scheduled item. While in Karnataka Form II permit is not granted because it has been removed from the Timber Transit Rules, it is only in the State of Tamil Nadu, Rules still contain their requirements of Forms II and III permits. While the impact of Forms I and II is to have the details of the timber quantity and the name and residence of the person to whom the pass is granted and when it was obtained to what place it is being removed, the route time allowed, including the vehicle registration Number, the way permit is only a consequential document in Form III. Therefore, the idea of exchanging Form II with Form III is only to have the details recorded from the place of origin so that the way permit can be granted. If the authorities of the Government of Karnataka have stopped issuing Form II permit, that does not mean that the Tamil Nadu officials will seek for the production of the said permit as a pre-condition to issue Form III. This will unnecessarily create a bottleneck and as stated by the petitioner, it involves unnecessary expenditure and time and it will frustrate the very timber trade resulting in a source of corruption. Therefore, if the authorities want to issue Form III with the particulars which are to be found in Form II, it can be gathered from the other documents produced along with the lorry if the timber is transited. They can verify the same and issue the way permit instead of seeking for a certificate under Form II which obviously the petitioners cannot produce. Even the Tamil Nadu Government officials themselves cannot issue those certificates as the origin of timber is from elsewhere and no person will certify them as a proper proof of other supporting documents. They can verify the same and issue the way permit instead of seeking for a certificate under Form II which obviously the petitioners cannot produce. Even the Tamil Nadu Government officials themselves cannot issue those certificates as the origin of timber is from elsewhere and no person will certify them as a proper proof of other supporting documents. If the understanding of the respondents is that Form II is pre-requisite for issuing Form III permit, then they should also spell out as to how the Tamil Nadu State officials are competent to issue Form II in respect of a timber whose origin is not from this State but from some other States. 9. The stand taken by the respondents is that necessarily they will have to apply to the State authorities for a Form II permit. Even then, the question will be such a permit can be issued in Form II only depending upon the materials and documents produced by the timber merchants and sent along with the lorry in which the transit is being made. If all those materials are available, depending on the strength of the very same documents, the respondents can issue Form III without insisting upon Form II, which has become an empty formality. Further, it will also reduce the bottleneck created in transit. Therefore, the prayer made by the petitioners is reasonable and is consistent with the Rules made by the State and the Rules are also not under challenge. The Rules of procedure is only a hand-maid and it cannot become an obstacle in the smooth transit of passage of goods. The authorities have spent more energy on the form than on the substance of verification of the contents of the goods transported. 10. In view of the same, the writ petitions are entitled to succeed and a direction is issued to the respondents to provide Form III to the petitioners to transport Silver Oaks from Karnataka to Tamil Nadu at various checkposts in Tamil Nadu border if the petitioners accompany Silver Oak timber logs with valid documents except the transport permit issued by the State of Karnataka. But the documents should provide for information that are required under Form II for issuing necessary permit. The writ petitions shall stand allowed. However, there will be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions will stand closed.