- (1.) Present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment delivered by the learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4230 of 2000 dated 7th December, 2001 whereby, writ petition preferred by the present" Appellants has been dismissed and therefore, the present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred.
(2.) Important issue raised in this Letters Patent Appeals: Whether market fee can be levied and collected under Section 27 of Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as the Act, 1960'), by the Respondents-Dhanbad Market Committee on plywood, ply board and ply without any notification issued by the State Government under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, 1960 in relation to plywood, ply board and ply.
(3.) Factual Matrix (i) Bihar Agricultural Produce Market Act brought into force with effect from the year, 1960 with a view to have organized markets of agricultural and allied commodities. (ii) The Act was enacted on 6th August, 1960 to provide for the better Regulation of buying and selling of agricultural produce and the establishment of markets for agricultural produce in the State of Bihar (old Bihar) and for the matter connected therewith. (iii) Appellant No. 1 is an Association of dealers situated in district of Dhanbad and Bokaro of the State of Jharkhand. Appellant Nos. 2 to 15 are dealers of Dhanbad, who are dealing in finished manufactured products namely plywood, ply board and ply. (iv) The State vide S.O. No. 2561 dated 31st August, 2000 added plywood, ply board, ply patti, core and veneer in the schedule appended to the Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1960 under Section 39 of the said Act. By virtue of this notification, the Market Committee started realising market fee from Appellants and Ors. in respect of sale/purchase of plywood, ply board, ply patti, core, fali and veneer. Wood' was already notified as Item No. XII Miscellaneous at Serial No. 15, 'Bamboo' at Item No. 14 and 'Wood Dhoop' at Item No. 16. These entries were already in existence before 31st August, 2000. As the Market Committee has issued notices in December, 2000 demanding market fees from the Appellants, a writ petition was preferred which was dismissed and therefore, the present appeal has been preferred mainly on the ground that without issuing notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, 1960, market fees cannot be imposed and levied from the Appellants.;