STATE OF U.P. vs M/S. SITAPUR PACKING WOOD SUPPLIERS.ETC

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Rule 5 of the U.P. Transit of Timber and Other Forest Produce Rules, 1978, which imposes a transit fee for the movement of forest produce. However, the Court agreed with the High Court's finding that the levy of transit fee is invalid due to the absence of quid pro quo, emphasizing that the State must provide a service in return for the fee. The Court clarified that while the rule itself is valid under Sections 41, 42, 51, and 76 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, the fee cannot be levied without corresponding services rendered by the State.