Chattisgarh High CourtShri Karani Traders vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 16 December, 2021Author:P. Sam KoshyBench:P. Sam Koshy-1-\n\n\n                                                                       NAFR\n           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR\n                   Writ Petition (C) No. 5250 of 2021\n\n   Jai Durga Rice Mill Having Its Registered Office At Link Road, Bhatapara,\n   District Baloda - Bazaar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh Through Its Partner\n   Mukesh Kumar Tharani S/o Bhagwan Das Tharani Aged About 52 Years\n   R/o Munshi Ismail Ward, Vip Colony, Bhatapara, District Baloda - Bazaar\n   Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.\n                                                           ---Petitioner(s)\n                             Versus\n1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Agriculture,\n   Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh\n2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Mantralaya, Mahanadi\n   Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh\n3. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Baloda Bazaar, Through Its Secretary, Krishi\n   Upaj Mandi Samiti, District - Baloda Bazaar - Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh\n                                                          ---RespondentsWrit Petition (C) No. 5254 of 2021\n\n   Shri Karani Traders Having Its Registered Office At Gandhi Mandir Ward,\n   Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazaar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh Through Its\n   Partner Arun Kumar Mundhra S/o Late Durgadas Mundhra Aged About 54\n   Years, R/o Sadar Bazar Ward, Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazaar\n   Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.---Petitioner(s)\n                             Versus1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Agriculture,\n   Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Mantralaya, Mahanadi\n   Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh3. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Baloda Bazaar, Through Its Secretary, Krishi\n   Upaj Mandi Samiti, District - Baloda Bazaar - Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.---Respondents\n                                    &\n                   Writ Petition (C) No. 5256 of 2021\n\n   Siyaram Rice Mill Having Its Registered Office At Gram Kholwa,\n   Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh, Through Its\n   Partner, Sandeep Kumar Agrawal S/o Prem Chandra Agrawal, Aged About\n   48 Years, Resident Of Near Sati Mandir, Nehru Ward, Bhatapara, District\n   Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.---Petitioner(s)\n                                Versus1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Agriculture,\n   Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Mantralaya, Mahanadi\n   Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh3. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Baloda Bazaar, Through Its Secretary, Krishi\n   Upaj Mandi Samiti, District - Baloda Bazaar - Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.---Respondents-2-For Petitioners                      :    Shri Pranjal Agrawal, Advocate.\n      For Respondent/State                 :    Shri Ashish Tiwari, Govt. Advocate, Ms.\n                                                Astha Shukla and Ms. Shriya Mishra, Panel\n                                                Lawyers.For Respondent No.3                  :    Shri Amrito Das, Advocate.Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy\n                                    Order on Board\n\n16.12.2021   .1. Since common facts and issues are involved in all these writ petitions, they\n\n      are being disposed of by this common order.2. The writ petitions have been filed for the following relief(s)-"10.2. To issue a writ of appropriate nature directing the\n                 respondent to suspend and not to invoke Section 19(1)(ii) of\n                 the Chhattisgarh Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972 for the\n                 levy of market fee on the petitioner for paddy brought from\n                 outside the State for processing and manufacturing where\n                 transaction has not taken place with the market area being\n                 arbitrary and illegal."3. The petitioners seem to be apprehending levy of market fees by the\n\n      respondent No.3. for the paddy which they intend to mill at their Rice Mills\n\n      which is coming from outside the territories of the State of Chhattisgarh.\n\n      Learned counsel for the petitioners referring to the judgment of Supreme\n\n      Court in case ofGujarat Ambuja Exports Limited and Another Vs. State of\n\n      Uttarakhand and Others, 2016 (3) SCC 601 submits that the pari-materia\n\n      provision applicable in the State of Uttarakhand has already been struck\n\n      down by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment.That, further on the\n\n      basis of the aforesaid judgment in the case ofGujarat Ambuja(Supra) the\n\n      Division Bench of this High Court also in bunch of writ petitions, leading\n\n      case of which being WPC No.1207 of 2019 (Shree Sita Agro Tech Pvt. Ltd.\n\n      Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) decided on 08.05.2019, have-3-reiterated the stand taken inthe said judgmentand have in paragraphs\n\n   5&6 held as under:"5. In view of the statement made, we dispose of all the Writ\n         Petitions with the direction that the respondents shall not\n         invoke Section 19 (1) (ii) of the Adhiniyam, 1972 for levy of\n         market fee on the petitioners for paddy brought from outside\n         the   State    for   processing   and   manufacturing     where\n         transaction has not taken place within the market area.6. If the statute permits levy of market fees for any other\n         transaction, than what is covered under Section 19 (1) (ii) of\n         the Adhiniyam, 1972, the concerned market committee would\n         be at liberty to consider the same on transaction basis."4. Today, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 as also the counsel\n\n   for State make a statement that both the State of Chhattisgarh as also the\n\n   respondent No.3 have been abiding by the judgment of Division Bench in\n\n   case ofShree Sita Agro Tech(Supra). The whole contention of the counsel\n\n   appearing for the respondents are that the respondents under no\n\n   circumstances would be levying market fees on the paddy which is being\n\n   brought from outside of territories of the State of Chhattisgarh only for the\n\n   purpose of milling and manufacturing subject to the finish product i.e. rice\n\n   or paddy not being sold or transacted in any manner within the territories\n\n   of the State of Chhattisgarh. According to the respondents counsel, if the\n\n   petitioners after milling sends back the finished product to the place where\n\n   if came from for milling the market fees will not be levied otherwise the\n\n   product becomes leviable.5. The apprehension raised by the learned counsel for the respondents have\n\n   been squarely dealt with in the aforementioned judgment of Division\n\n   Bench of this High Court inShree Sita Agro Tech(Supra).6. Given the aforesaid statements made by the counsel appearing for the\n\n   respondents and the stand that have been taken by the respondents, the-4-petitioners should not have any apprehension as of now so far as the\n\n           respondents levying market fees on paddy which is being brought from\n\n           outside the territories of the State of Chhattisgarh into the petitioners\n\n           establishment only for milling/processing/manufacturing and thereafter\n\n           returning it back to the source from where it has come. However, the\n\n           petitioners would be subjected to levy of any other tax or fees, as the case\n\n           may be, in case if the paddy which has been brought from outside the\n\n           territories of the State of Chhattisgarh is being sold either in the form of\n\n           paddy or in the form of finished product after processing within the State of\n\n           Chhattisgarh.7. With the aforesaid observations and the judgment referred to in the\n\n           preceding paragraphs, all the writ petitions stand disposed of.Sd/-(P. Sam Koshy)\n                                                                          Judge\n\n\ninder