The power to cancel or modify a notification under Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, must be exercised within the limits prescribed by the provision conferring the said power.

S.K. Choudhuri, J.

1. In this writ application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners who carry on business in agricultural produce in their business premises in Purani Godown, Gaya; pray for quashing Annexures 1, 2, 3 and 4 to the writ application and Annexure 6 to the petition filed by the petitioners under Section 151 during the pendency of the application. Annexure 1 is a letter dated the 21st November, 1978 issued by the District Magistrate and Collector, Gaya (respondent no. 4) to petitioner no. 1 directing him to get his food grains dealers licence amended by 30.11.78 and conduct his business in the notified agricultural produce within the principal market yard at Chandouti, Gaya, with effect from 1.12.78. Annexure 2 is a letter of the same date issued by respondent no. 4 to petitioner no. 1 by which petitioner no. 1 was directed to commence business of sale, purchase and storage of food-grains in the newly constituted principal market yard at Chandouti, Gaya with effect from 1.12.78 and it was further stated in that annexure that the licence issued under the Bihar Food grains Dealer's Licensing ORDER :1967 would stand amended accordingly. Annexure 3 is a letter dated 20.11.78 issued by the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Gaya respondent no. 3 to petitioner no. 1 informing him that the process of allotment of land on lease on payment of Rs. 2,000/- as reserved' money and monthly rental of Rs. 250/- for the premises of the principal market yard at Chandouti, Gaya was going on. It may be stated here that letters like Annexures 1, 2 and 3 were issued to other petitioners also and these three annexures have been annexed to the writ application as specimen copies. By notification dated 28th February 1978. Annexure 4, a new principal market yard at Chandouti, Gaya has been constituted in place of the old one which was declared under the notification dated April 7, 1964 and the sub-market yard constituted under the notifications, dated April 7, 1964 and October, 19, 1973 have been cancelled. The effect of issuance of Annexure 4 was that except the new principal market yard established at Chandouti, Gaya there existed no other principal market yard or sub-market yards. It may be stated here that subsequent to the admission of the writ application the Secretary of the Bihar State Agricultural Market Board circulated a printed leaflet issued by the State Government under which the notification Annexure 4 dated 28.2.78 was amended to this effect that in addition to Chandouti market, the market yards established under notification dated 7.4.1964 and 19.10.1973 were restored. The learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, was going to make a prayer for withdrawal of the writ application when the learned counsel for the respondents informed the court about a subsequent notification dated 27.6.79 under which the original position as it was under Annexure 4 was restored. Hence the learned counsel resiled from the prayer for withdrawal from the writ application and filed an application under Section 151 C.P.C. annexing copies of the aforesaid leaflet and the notification as annexures 5 and 6 respectively and have prayed for quashing Annexure 6 also.

2. It is not disputed that the State Government issued a notification under Section 5(2)(ii) of the Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960 (Bihar Act XVI of 1960) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) declaring the entire area under the jurisdiction of Gaya Municipality including several villages as market proper. It is also not disputed that the State Government issued another notification 7.4.64 under Section 5(2)(i) of the Act declaring the Mahalla Purani Godown within Gaya Police Station to be principal market yard and the locality known as Kedarnath Market within the same police station as sub-market yard. These two notifications have not been challenged in the present writ application and as such they have also not been made an