The Government, not the Market Committee, has the authority to impose market charges, including commission, under the Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 and the Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Rules, 1966.

( 1 ) (DELIVERED by the Chief Justice) the short but important question which has necessa ily to be answered in this enquiry is whether market charges can be imposed by the market Committee.

( 2 ) THE essential facts are that the petitioners are merchants carrying on trade in foodgrains seeds and other agricultural products, They do this business on commisson basis. Apart from charging commission on their transactions, the petitioners charge also godown charges as well as insurance charges actually incurred bye-law 12 of 1954 Bye-laws permit commission to be charged at the rate of Rs. 2-25 paise per 100. In view of the various changes occurring in the economic conditions, the petitioners and other merchants requested the Market committee to increase the rate of commrssion The market Committee met at a meeting on 28-11-1969, They resolved to increase the rate of commission from 21\4 % to 3%. They also approved the amendment to Bye-law 12 (3 ).

( 3 ) THE resolution together with the proposed amendment to the bye-law was then sent to the Director of Marketing for approval. He approved the same on 15-1-70 the Government in exercise of its powers under section 27 of the aadhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 (Act 16 of 1966), herein after called the Act, set aside the order of the oirector of Marketing approving the Resolution of the Market Committee and amendment of the Bye-law The Government held that it is within the exclusive competence of the Government to impose market charges and that neither the Market Committee nor the Director is the authority to impose such charges This order was passed on 16-2-70 it is to question the validity of this order that the present writ petition is filed. The petitioners have asked for the issue of a writ of mandamus restraining respondents 1 and 2 from interfering with the right of petitioners to carry on their business in accordance with the amended bye-laws 12 (3 ).

( 4 ) THE principal contention of Sri P. Babulu Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioners was that under Rule 45 the Market committee is empowered to levy market charges which includes the authority to impose the commission charges. The Resolution of the Market committee therefore was well within its power and the Government could not have set it aside on the ground that Market committee has no such power.

( 5 ) IN order to appreciate the implications of this contention it is necessary to mention that under section 35 (2) (XXV) of the Act, the government is empowered to make rules and provide for the regulation of market charges such as commission, weighment charges go down charges and other incidental charges. Section 34 then says that subject to any rules made by the Government under section 33 and with the previous sanction of the director of Marketing, a market committee may make byelaws for the regulation of the business and the conditions of trading therein. In exercise of the powers conferred on the Government under section 33 (2) (XXV) the Government made certain rules. Rule 45 on which reliance is placed by the petitioners in so far as it is relevant reads:"rule 45 : The market committee shall make bye-laws under section 34 consistent with these rules and model bye-laws framed by the Director to regulate its own procedure and to specify the conditions of trading in the notified area. The bye-laws shall, inter alia provide for- (1 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4) the levy of market charges. . . . . . Rule 64 then goes on to say that when the agricultural produce is sold through a commission agent he shall pay the sale proceeds of the agricultural pro luce from his own account the seller on the same day of its sale after deducting the charge payable by the latter as permissible under the bye-laws of the market committee and recover the same from the buyer. "

( 6 ) RULE 73 which relates to mar

Click Here to Read the rest of this document