Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.S. PATHAK, O. CHINNAPPA REDDY AND BARARUL ISLAM, JJ.
Writ Petns. Nos. 692, 937-1063, 1111-1115, 1558 of 1980; Civil Appeal No. 1895 of 1979* (with W. P. Nos. 5441-62 of 1980 and W. P. No. 6217 of 1980; C. A. Nos. 3297 and 2689 of 1979)**; W. P. Nos. 6529 to 6551 of 1980; Civil Appeal No. 1507 of 1980*1, Civil Appeals Nos. 1715-1716 of 1980**2, D/- 172-1981.
(1) Rameshchandra Kachardas Porwal and others, (2) M/s. Narayandas Govinddas and others and (3) Sha Moteejee Virchandji and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra and others, Respondents
WITH
Parvinchandra Kesharlal, Petitioner
Versus
S. M. Kuray and others, Respondents;
WITH
M. V. Manjunath and others, Appellants
Versus
Chief Marketing Officer and others, Respondents;
WITH
M/s. Appasaheb Bharamappa Vankundra and others, Petitioners
Versus
Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee, Belgaum and another, Respondents;
WITH
Basudeo Prasad and others, Appellants
Versus
State of Bihar and others, Respondents;
AND
Bhagwan Das Gopal Prasad and others, Appellants
Versus
State of Bihar and others, Respondents.
Advocates appeared
M/s. S. V. Gupta, V. M. Tarkunde, Soli J. Sorabjee, K. K. Venugopal (in W. P. 937/80), Sr. Advs., M/s. K. N. Bhatt and T. S. Sundrajan, Advs. (in W. P. Nos. 692, 937-1063 and 1111-1115/80), and Dr. Y. S. Chitale, Sr. Adv. and Mr. R. P. Bhatt, Sr. Adv, Mr. A. K. Goel, Adv. (in W. P. No. 1558/80), for Petitioner; M/s. S. G.. Sundraswamy, Ravindran, Viajy Kumar Verma and K. N. Bhat, Advs. (in CA Nos. 1895 and 2689/79), Mr. V. M. Tarkunde, Sr. Adv., M/.s K, R, Nagaraja, P. K. Rao and Aloke Bhattacharya, Advs. (in CA No. 3297/79) and Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, Sr. Adv., M/s. B. P. Maheshwari and Suresh Sethi and Miss Asha Jain, Advs. (in CA No. 1507/80), for Appellants; Mr. Lal Narain Sinha, Attorney General Mr. O. P. Rana, Sr. Adv. and M. N. Shroff, Advs., for Respondent No. 1 in WP Nos. 692, 937-1063 and 1111-1115/80. Mr. A. K. Goyal, Adv. for Petitioner in WP Nos. 5441-62 of 1980, Mr. K. K. Singhvi, Sr. Adv., M/s. A. K. Gupta, Brji Bhushan (in WP No. 692/80) and N. P. Mahindru, Advs. (for No. 3) in WP Nos. 692, 937-1063, 1111-1115/80 and in WP No. 1558/80 and Mr. Lal Narian Sinha Attorney General (in CA No. 1895) and Mr. N. Nettar, Adv. (for No. 1) in CA No. 1895 and 2689/79, for Respondents. Mr. B. Keshava Iyengar, Advocate General and Mr. N. Nettar, Adv., for State of karnataka in CA Nos. 1895 & 2689/79, Mr. H. B. Datar, Sr. Adv., Miss, Madhu Moolchandani and R. B. Datar, Advs. (for No. 2) in CA Nos. 1895 & 2689/79 and Mr. K. K. Singhiv, Sr. Adv., M/s. N. P. Mahindru & A. K. Gupta, Advs. (for No. 3) in WP Nos. 5441-62/80, for Respondentss; M/s. S. S. Javali, B. P. Singh, Ranjit Kumar and Ravi Prakash, Advs, (in CA No. 1985/79) and Mr. L. N. Sinha, Attorney General. Mr. R. B. Metho, Sr. Adv., M/s. B. P. Sinha and Naresh K. Sharma, Advs. (in WP No. 692/80), for the Interveners, Mr. Lal Narian, Sinha, Attorney General, Mr. R. B. Metho, Sr. Adv., 1131 M/s. B. P. Singh, Ravi Prasash, Ranjit Kumar and Naresh K. Sharma, Advs. for Respondent Nos. 3-5 in CA No. 1507/80, M/.s K. G. Bhagat and D. Goburdhan, Advs., for State of Bihar in CA No. 1507/80, Mr. S. S. Ray, Sr. Ad., (in CA No. 1715/80) and Mr. M. P. Jha, Adv., for Appellant in C. A. Nos. 1715-1716/80, Mr. Lal Narian Sinha, Attorney General, Mr. R. B. Metho, Sr. Adv., M/s. B. P. Singh, Ravi Prakash, Ranjit Kumar, Naresh K. Respondent Nos. 3-5 in CA Nos/ 1715-1716/80, Mr. V. M. Tarkunde, Sr. Adv., M/d. K. R. Nagaraja, P. K. Rao and Aloke Bhattacharya, Advs., for Peitioner in WP Nos. 6217, 6551/80. Mr. H. B. Datar, Sr. Adv., Miss Madhu Molllchandani and R. B. Dattar, Advs., for Respondent (Market Committee(, Mr. H. B. Dater, Sr. Adv., Mr. N. Nettar, Adv., for the State of Karnataka, M/s. K. G. Bhagat and D. Goburdhan, Advs., for the State of Bihar in CA Nos. 1715-1716/80, Mr. V. M. Tarkunde, Sr. Adv., M.s, P. K. Aloke Bhattacharya and K. R. Nagarija, Advs., for Petitioner in WP Nos. 6529-51/80; Mr. N. Nettar, Adv., for Respondent in WP Nos. 6529-51/80,
(Para 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17 & 18)
Judgment
CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.:- Reluctant traders, un-willing to move their places of business into the markets or market yards as they are differently called in the States of Maharashtra, Bihar and Karnataka, set up by respective Market Committees under various State Agricultural Produce Marketing Acts, offer their resistance through these Writ Petitions and Civil Appeals. We will first recite the facts in one of the cases (Writ Petition No. 692 of 1980) and thereafter consider the questions raised in that as well as the other cases. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 692 of 1980 is a trader presently carrying on business in Gur and other commodities at 1221, Bhavani Peth, Pune. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4A (2) of the Bombay Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1939, by a notification dated July 6, 1961, the locality known as Bhavanipeth and Nanapeth of the Pune City was declared as one of the principal market yards for the market area consisting of Pune City and Haveli Talukas. The market area had been so declared by a notification dated May 1, 1957, pursuant to a declaration that it was intended to regulate the purchase and sale of gur in the market area. The Bombay Agricultural Produce Markets A 1939, was repealed and replaced by the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963. By Section 64 of the Act the notifications previously issued etc., under the provisions of the repealed Act were kept alive for the purposes of the new Act. On March 23, 1971, the present Market Committee known as Krishi Utpanna Bazar Samiti, Pune, was constituted under Sec. 4 (1) of the 1963 Act. On April 21, 1971, the Director of Agricultural Marketing published a notification declaring his intention to regulate marketing of a larger number of commodities in the market area of Haveli and Pune City Taluka. On October 4, 1975, the Director of Agricultural Marketing, Maharashtra State, exercing his powers under Section 5 (2), of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963, declared the locality known as Market Yard Gultekadi as the principal market for the market area for the marketing of various commodities specified in the notification. Thereafter on October 8, 1975, a Circular was issued to all Adatis, merchants, and licence holders, particularly wholesale dealers dealing in Gur, Halad, Dhania, etc., in the vicinity of Bhavanipeth-Nanapeth informing them that Bhavanipeth-Nanapeth will cease to be a market from the midnight of Oct. 13, 1975 and that the market yard Gultekadi had been declared as the principal market for the market area. The circular went on to say that anyone carrying on business anywhere except Gultekadi was liable to be prosecuted. The result of the notification dated October 4, 1975, and the Circular, dated October 8, 1975, was that it was not permissible for anyone to carry on trade in any of the notified agricultural commodities outside the Gultekadi market yard on and after October 14, 1975. It meant that traders like the petitioner who had for generations been carrying on business in those commodities in Bhavanipeth-Nanapeth had perforce to move into Gultekadi market yard if they wanted to stay in the business. Consequent upon representations made by the Pune Merchants Chamber and the interim order in a Writ Petition filed in the Bombay High Court by the Chamber the date notified for the commencement of the functioning of the Principal Market in Gultekadi was postponed from time to time. Finally, by a public notice dated March 6, 1980, all wholesale traders, commission agents and others dealing in agricultural produce in Bhavanipeth-Nanapeth and surrounding areas were informed that with effect from March 17, 1980, wholesale trade in the regulated agricultural produce could be carried on in the Gultekadi market yard only. The petitioner seeks to resist the situation thus sought to be forced upon him and challenges the notification dated October 4, 1975, and the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
