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

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 1462

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
T. Madhavi Devi, J.
M/s Kavitha Paraboiled Rice Industries – Appellant 
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent 
I.A.No.2 of 2024 In W.P.No.13907 of 2024, Writ Petition No.13907 of 2024, I.A.No.2 of 2024 In W.P.No.13909 of 2024, Writ Petition No.13909 of 2024, I.A.No.2 of 2024 In W.P.No.13914 of 2024, Writ Petition No.13914 of 2024, I.A.No.2 of 2024 In W.P.No.13915 of 2024, Writ Petition No.13915 of 2024, I.A.No.2 of 2024 In W.P.No.13946 of 2024, Writ Petition No.13946 of 2024, I.A.No.2 of 2024 In W.P.No.13968 of 2024, Writ Petition No.13968 of 2024, I.A.No.4 of 2024 In W.P.No.17444 of 2024, Writ Petition No.17444 of 2024 And Writ Petition No.17954 of 2024 
Decided On : 21-01-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : V.V.N.NARAYANA RAO
For the Respondent:  GP FOR AGRICULTURE

Writ Petitions are maintainable when assessing authorities violate jurisdiction or natural justice, highlighting the necessity of due process in administrative assessments.

Headnote:(A) Telangana (Agricultural Produce & Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 - Sections 12(1), 12

(B), 12(E) and 12(F) - Writ Petitions challenging market fee assessment and the renewal of trade licenses - Petitioners claimed exemptions based on improper assessments post three-year limit and lack of natural justice - Court finds failure to notify petitioners of assessment issues violates principles of natural justice. (Paras 1-17)

(B) Writ jurisdiction - Maintainability - Writ petitions are maintainable when assessing authority exceeds jurisdiction or violates natural justice despite availability of alternative remedies. (Para 16)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, license holders dealing with agricultural produce, challenge unlawful market fee assessments during 2020-2023 and non-renewal of licenses.

Findings of Court:
Impugned assessments are set aside with a direction for reassessment following due process and natural justice; licensing requests may be reconsidered.

Issues: Legality of assessment orders, jurisdiction of the assessing authority, and renewal of licenses.

Ratio Decidendi: Court emphasizes that assessment without proper notice violates the Act and natural justice and confirms writ jurisdiction in such scenarios despite alternative remedies being available.

Result: Writ Petitions allowed and assessment set aside.

Table of Content
1. challenging market fee assessment and licence renewal procedures. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments regarding assessment jurisdiction and alternative remedies. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. court's findings on the assessment procedure violations. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. exceptions to alternative remedies ruling, citing natural justice. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
5. court's decision to set aside assessments and allow renewal of licenses. (Para 17 , 18 , 19)

ORDER :

T. Madhavi Devi, J.

In these Writ Petitions, the petitioners are challenging the assessment of the market fees payable by the petitioners on purchase of rice/paddy from outside the State for the assessment years 2020-2021, 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, without power, without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of the Telangana (Agricultural Produce & Live Stock) Markets Act, 1966 and the Rules made thereunder and also challenging the order dt.28.06.2024 rejecting the renewal of trade licences of the petitioners as illegal and arbitrary and to set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to renew the trade licences of the petitioners for a further period of three years from 2024 to 2027 and to pass such other order or orders.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petitions are that the petitioners are licence holders who are dealing with agricultural produce and claim to be paying necessary market fees by producing relevant records. It is submitted that the petitioners have been purchasing rice from outside the State of Telangana, i.e., Bihar and Uttar Pradesh and the 3rd respondent in W.P.Nos.13907, 13909, 13914, 13915, 13946 and 13968 of 2024 has been exempting the petitioners from payment of market fees on purchase of rice/paddy from outside the State and export to other countries in terms of G.O.Ms.No.96, Agriculture and Cooperation (AM-IV) Department, dt.19.10.2013 and also in terms of the Circular No. Projects/38/2005 dt.28.11.2013 of the 2nd respondent.

3. It is submitted that, for the first time, the 3rd respondent in W.P.Nos.13907, 13909, 13914, 13915, 13946 and 13968 of 2024 has assessed the market fees on the rice purchased from other States for the assessment years 2020-2021, 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 contrary to the instructions of the 1st and 2nd respondents. It is submitted that Sections 12(1) and 12(B) of the Telangana (Agricultural Produce & Live Stock) Markets Act, 1966 (for short, “the Act”) provide for charging and levying of market fee on the notified agricultural produce and that the 3rd respondent in W.P.Nos.13907, 13909, 13914, 13915, 13946 and 13968 of 2024 shall assess the market fee only on purchase or sale of the agricultural produce in the notified market area. It is submitted that under Section 12-B of the Act, only if the return submitted by the assessee is incorrect or incomplete, the assessing authority shall, after giving the trader an opportunity of providing the correctness and completeness of the return submitted by him and after making such enquiry as it considers necessary, assess to the best of its judgment, the amount of market fee, due from the trader. It is submitted that the assessment under this Section shall, however, be made only within a period of three (3) years from the expiry of the years to which the assessment relates. It is submitted that in this case, the assessments are made for the year 2020-2021 in the year 2024 i.e., after expiry of three (3) years to which the assessments relate and further that no documents were called for from the petitioners before making the assessment. Therefore, according to the petitioners, the assessment is not only without jurisdiction but also is in violation of the principles of natural justice and the guidelines issued therefor.

4. At the time of admission of the Writ Petitions, this Court had directed the respondents not to take any coercive steps for implementation of the impugned assessment orders.

5. The 3

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