SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(SC) 189

K.JAGANNATHA SHETTY, R.M.SAHAI
Kishan Lal: Om Prakash – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
B.D.SHARMA, D.K.SINGH, D.N.DEVEDI, L.M.SINGHVI, NARAIN, SANDIP NARAYAN, SARVA M.MITTER, Shrid Rizvi

Judgment

R. M. SAHAI, J.:- Validity of Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Marketing Act, 1961 (for brevity the Act) levying market-fee on sale and purchase of agricultural produce in market-yard or sub-market-yard was challenged by dealers for lack of legislative competence, violation of Articles 14, 19, 301 and 304 of Constitution, absence of any quid pro quo in the fee paid and service rendered, illegal and arbitrary inclusion of manufactured articles such as Khandsari, Shakkar, Gur and Sugar as agricultural produce in the schedule etc.

2. Acts of other States, for instance, Punjab and Haryana and U.P. were also assailed for similar infirmities. Whether these petitions, which appear to be identical, are reproduction of any of those petitions, which were pending in this Court from before is not relevant but various group of petitions of Punjab and Haryana dealers challenging constitutionality and legality of Act and its provisions including Gur, Khandsari and Shakkar as agricultural produce in the schedule of Punjab Act have been dismissed by different benches presumably because of decisions in Kewal Krishan Puri v. State of Punjab (1979) 3 SCR 1217, Ramesh Chandra v. State of U.P. (198







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top