Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : P.CHENNAKESAVA REDDY, SARDAR ALI KHAN
Sri Lashmi Dry Fish Traders - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Decided On : 04-10-85
AP AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE AND LIVESTOCK MARKETS ACT, 1966 - SECTION 2(V), 2(XV), 3(3) - DRY FISH NOT LIVESTOCK - NOTIFICATION INCLUDING DRY FISH AS LIVESTOCK INVALID.
Fact of the Case:
Writ petitions challenging the validity of a notification issued by the State Government declaring dry fish as livestock under the AP Agricultural Produce and Livestock Markets Act, 1966. Petitioners, dealers in dry fish, were prosecuted for not obtaining a license under the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that dry fish is not livestock within the meaning of Section 2(v) of the Act. The definition of livestock in the Act includes only animals with life. Dry fish is a different product from fish with or without life and has undergone a change.
Issues: Whether dry fish falls within the definition of livestock under Section 2(v) of the AP Agricultural Produce and Livestock Markets Act, 1966.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the definition of livestock in Section 2(v) of the Act strictly, holding that it includes only animals with life. The court also considered the common parlance meaning of fish and found that it does not include dry fish. The court further noted that the impugned notification itself did not include dry fish in the livestock group.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ appeals and quashed the impugned notification insofar as it included dry fish in Schedule II.
( 1 ) IN these writ appeals a question of general interest and frequent occurrence is raised for decision. The question is whether the definition of livestock in S. 2 (v) of the A. P. Agricultural Produce and Livestock Markets Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) takes within its scope and ambit also dry fish and the declaration made by the Government under S. 3 (3) of the Act specifying dry fish as livestock in Schedule II to the notification of the State Government published in the A. P. Gazette dt. 7-11-1978 is valid.
( 2 ) THE writ petitioners are dealers in dry fish. A notice was issued to the petitioners by the Agricultural Market Committees, Itchpuram, asking them to obtain necessary licence by paying the necessary fee under S. (91) (7 (1)?) of the Act on the ground that they were carrying on business of purchase and sale in agricultural produce. But the petitioners did not obtain the necessary licence and carried on their business in 1980. The petitioner sent a reply to the Agricultural Market Committee informing them that the business in dry fish does not come within the purview of the Act and therefore there was no necessity to obtain any licence. As the petitioners continued to carry on their business without obtaining any licence under S. 7 (1) of the Act, criminal cases were instituted against the petitioners and some others. Aggrieved against the prosecution the petitioners filed the writ petitions. The learned single Judge (Raghuvir, J. dismissed the writ petitions) holding that the word fish in S. 2 (v) of the Act includes dry fish also and so the notification was valid. This indeed, is the genesis of the writ appeals.
( 3 ) THE only question for decision is whether dry fish is livestock falling within the definition of livestock in S. 2 (v) of the Act. It is, therefore, necessary to read the definition of livestock in S. 2 (v) of the Act. "2 (V) livestock means cows, buffaloes, bullocks, bulls, goats and sheep and includes poultry, fish and such other animals as may be declared by the Government by notification to be livestock for the purposes of this Act. " it would be useful also to read the definition of products of livestock in S. 2 (xv) of the Act. "2 (xv) products of livestock means such products of livestock as may be declared by the Government by notification, to be products of livestock for the purposes of this Act. "
( 4 ) IN the impugned notification dt. 7-11-1978 in the group-V the livestock fish is not included. What are included in that group are : 1) Bull, 2) Bullock, 3) Cow, 4) Beifer, 5) Buffalo (Bull,) 6) He Buffalo, 7) She Buffalo, 8) Young Stock of Buffalo, 9) Sheep and 10) Goats. In group VI of the Livestock Products what are included are : 1) Raw Hides, 2) Raw skins, 3) Bones, 4) Horn and Hoof, 5) Hair and wool and 6) Ghee, fish group is separated from livestock group and in this group what are included are : 1) Live Fish including fish with or without life in any form (inserted by G. O. Ms. No. 406 F and A, dt. 21-7-1980), 2) Dry fish and 3) Live Prawn including Prawn with or without life in any form. Again under the group of poultry (group VII) only Hens, Ducks, and Cocks are included.
( 5 ) A close look at the definition of livestock would at once make it clear that the definition takes within its scope and ambit only animals with life. The meaning of the livestock given in the Concise Oxford Dictionary also is, animals kept or dealt in for use of profit. In the Chambers 20th Century Dictionary the meaning given for livestock is "domestic animals, esp. , horses, cattle, sheep and pigs. " The definition of livestock is widened under the Act to include poultry fish and such other animals as may be declared by the Government by its notification as livestock for the purpose of the Act. Even if fish is considered to be an animal the dry fish in our opinion, cannot fall within the sweep of the definition o
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.