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

1993 Supreme(P&H) 815

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
A.L.Bahri and N.K.Kapoor JJ.
Ram Rattan Om Parkash
Versus
State Of Punjab
Civil Writ Petition No. 7675 of 1993,
Decided On : SEPTEMBER 30, 1993

The Punjab Rural Development General Rules, 1987 framed under Section 10 of the Punjab Rural Development Act, 1987 are valid and legal as they were laid before the Parliament and no modification or annulment was suggested within the prescribed time.

Headnote:

RURAL DEVELOPMENT FUND - PUNJAB RURAL DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1987 - SECTION 5, 10 - VALIDITY OF RULES - The Punjab Rural Development General Rules, 1987 framed under Section 10 of the Act are valid and legal as they were laid before the Parliament and no modification or annulment was suggested within the prescribed time.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners, licensees under the Punjab Agricultural Produce Marketing Act, 1961, challenged the levy of rural development fund under the Punjab Rural Development Act, 1987, arguing that there was no Board in existence, no authority appointed to collect the fund, and no rules for recovery.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the levy of the fund is not dependent on the existence or constitution of the Board and that the Board was not required to separately pass an order levying the Rural Development Fund. The Court also held that the Punjab Rural Development General Rules, 1987 were valid and legal as they were laid before the Parliament and no modification or annulment was suggested within the prescribed time.

Issues: 1. Whether the levy of rural development fund is dependent on the existence or constitution of the Board? 2. Whether the Board was required to separately pass an order levying the Rural Development Fund? 3. Whether the Punjab Rural Development General Rules, 1987 are valid and legal?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the levy of the fund is not dependent on the existence or constitution of the Board, as it is leviable under Section 5 of the Development Act. 2. The Court held that the Board was not required to separately pass an order levying the Rural Development Fund, as the charging section is Section 5 in the Development Act. 3. The Court held that the Punjab Rural Development General Rules, 1987 are valid and legal as they were laid before the Parliament and no modification or annulment was suggested within the prescribed time.

Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the levy of rural development fund under the Punjab Rural Development Act, 1987 is valid and legal.

Judgment

A.L.BAHRI, J.

1. Replication taken on the record.

2. The petitioners belong to Sahnewal. They claim mandamus in this petition filed under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution commanding the respondents State of Punjab, Punjab Mandi Board, the Market Committee, Sahnewal and the Collector, Ludhiana, not to effect recovery of rural development fund. The petitioners are licensees under the Punjab Agricultural Produce Marketing Act, 1961. They purchase agricultural produce i.e paddy and bring the same into their shetlers converting it into rice and sell the same. They pay 2% of the sale price as market fee under the aforesaid Act and 4% purchased sales tax under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act. The respondents illegally wanted to claim rural development fund under the Punjab Rural Development Act, 1987 (hereinafter called "the Development Act") from the petitioners with respect to the agricultural produce purchased or brought by them as above. Notices were issued to them like Annexures P. 5 and P. 6 to pay rural development fund for the period April 198 8/04/1900 to the Market Committee. This led the petitioners to file the present petition.

3. The challenge in the Writ Petition to the levy of rural development fund is threefold. Firstly, it is argued that at the relevant period for which the fund is being collected, there was no Board in existence, as to be constituted under the provisions of the Act; secondly, such a Board as constituted under the Development Act has not appointed any authority to collect the fund and; thirdly, no rules are in existence under which the Market Committee could recover the fund from the petitioners under the Development Act.

4. On notice of motion having been issued written statement has been filed on behalf of the Punjab Mandi Board controverting all the allegations of the petitioner, inter alias asserting that the Punjab Rural Development (General) Rules, 1987 were framed under S. 10 of the Development Act authorising the Market Committee to recover the fund and to implement the provisions of the Development Act, the Market Committee has to follow the rules or the procedure prescribed in the rules framed under the Punjab Agricultural Market Produce Act. The Market Committee-respondent No. 3 filed a separate written statement, inter alia, asserting that the Development Act has been held to be valid by the Full Beach of this Court in C.W.P. No. 5599 of 1988. The petitioners have collected the fund from the purchasers and are thus duty bound to pay the same to the Market Committee under the rules referred to above.

5. Shri G. C. Dhuriwala, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioners has argued that at the relevant time there was no Board in existence as constituted under the provisions of the Development Act. The fund could not be levied. This contention is devoid of merit. The levy of fund is not dependent upon the existence or constitution of the Board. It is leviable under S.5 of the Development Act. Sec. 5(1) of the Development Act reads as under :-

5. Levy and collection of fee : (1) Subject to the rules made under this Act, there shall be levied for the purposes of this Act, a fee on ad valorem basis, at the rate of rupee one for every one hundred rupees, in respect of the agricultural produce, bought or sold or brought for processing in the notified market area Provided that except in case of agricultural produce brought for processing "no fee shall be leviable in respect of any transaction in which delivery of the agricultural produce bought or sold is not actually made." 5A. Reference was made to S. 3(2) of the Development Act which provides for establishment of the Board consisting of the persons mentioned therein. Further reference has been made to S. 3-A vide which Board was to be constituted by the persons mentioned therein and this amendment was inserted as per Punjab Rural Development Modification Order of 1988 issued in exercise of powers under S.12 of the Development A





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 Back to top