https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314208 No legal title in forest trees, timber, charcoal or kattha passed to the petitioners because the original contracts had expired, the forest officers lacked authority to effect a sale or valid extension, and the notification relied on did not itself authorise alienation of State forest produce. Mere permission, subsequent dealings, or alleged ratification could not transfer State property. As the petitioners therefore had no vested property right, their asserted right to hold and dispose of the produce was not established, and a petition under Article 32 could not lie on the footing of deprivation of property. The challenge to State action accordingly failed. en-us Thu, 13 Nov 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 May 2024 15:08:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314208 No legal title in forest trees, timber, charcoal or kattha passed to the petitioners because the original contracts had expired, the forest officers lacked authority to effect a sale or valid extension, and the notification relied on did not itself authorise alienation of State forest produce. Mere permission, subsequent dealings, or alleged ratification could not transfer State property. As the petitioners therefore had no vested property right, their asserted right to hold and dispose of the produce was not established, and a petition under Article 32 could not lie on the footing of deprivation of property. The challenge to State action accordingly failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 13 Nov 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314208