Freedom of Trade Under Article 301 Does Not Exempt Interstate Mineral Transporters From Mandatory Statutory Verification

The appellant is a transporter involved in the interstate carriage of minerals (mineral sand, M-sand, gravel) from Kerala to Tamil Nadu.

He filed a writ petition (W.P.No.39328 of 2025) seeking a mandamus to prevent State authorities from impeding his vehicles under the guise of "checking," except for minimal verification of E-passes.

The learned Single Judge disposed of the petition on 23.10.2025, recording the State’s assurance that no extra-legal restrictions would be imposed if the appellant produced valid transit permits from both Kerala and Tamil Nadu.

The appellant challenged this order via an intra-court appeal, contending that a Kerala-issued permit should suffice.

1. Whether the recording of a State’s undertaking by a Single Judge without a detailed merit-based adjudication constitutes an abdication of judicial function.

2. Whether routine regulatory checks of interstate mineral transport at border check-posts violate the fundamental right to trade and commerce under Articles 19(1)(g) and 301 of the Constitution of India.

Constitutional principles of Article 19(1)(g) regarding the right to practice any profession or carry on any trade and Article 301 regarding the freedom of trade, commerce, and intercourse throughout the territory of India.

Rights are not absolute and are subject to "reasonable restrictions" enacted for the public good.

Statutory power of State authorities to regulate mineral transit within their territorial boundaries to prevent illegal mining and theft.

The Bench rejected the appellant's argument that the Single Judge failed to apply judicial mind, noting that the order actually granted the substance of the relief by formalizing the State's commitment to allow free movement upon production of valid permits.

The court reasoned that a permit from the originating State (Kerala) does not insulate a transporter from the regulatory requirements of the destination/transit State (Tamil Nadu).

The court held that regulatory check-stops are "salutary measures" to ensure the rule of law rather than "arbitrary restrictions."

The court emphasized that granting transporters blanket immunity from administrative oversight would effectively license unregulated mineral transport.

The High Court dismissed the appeal, confirmed the Single Judge’s order, and ordered no costs.