Karnataka High Court
Akkirampura Grama Panchayat, ... vs State Of Karnataka And Others on 14 February, 2000
Equivalent citations: AIR2000KANT278, ILR2000KAR1594, 2000(4)KARLJ226, AIR 2000 KARNATAKA 278, (2000) ILR (KANT) 1594 (2000) 4 KANT LJ 226, (2000) 4 KANT LJ 226
Author: R. Gururajan
Bench: R. Gururajan
ORDER
1. This writ petition is filed by Akkirampura Grama Panchayat, Tumkur District seeking to declare that the petitioner is entitled to levy and collect fees in market area in Akkirampura Village in Koratagere Taluk, Tumkur District and further to quash Annexure-B, dated 28-10-1999 issued by the second respondent.
2. The petitioner states in the petition that in terms of the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act, the petitioner is entitled to collect fee and to levy fee under the said Act. He also states that the petitioner has the necessary power and jurisdiction to collect or levy market fee in respect of livestocks like sheep, cattle and goats. The petitioner had earlier filed W.P. No. 21590 of 1991 on the same cause of action, which came to be withdrawn by the petitioner. The further contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has right to collect the market fee and such right is not taken away under the provisions of the Agricultural Produce Market Act.
3. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for respondent 2, Mr. B.C. Sridharan states that the question involved in this case is a pure legal question. Counsel for 2nd respondent states that Section 8 is the answer to the various contentions urged in the writ petition.
4. This matter is taken up for final disposal with the consent of the parties.
5. Sri Viswanath, Counsel appearing for the petitioner-Panchayat invites my attention to various sections of the Panchayat Raj Act and contends that the petitioner-Panchayat has a right to collect the market fee. He also sates that there is no violation of any of the provisions of the A.P.M.C. Act.
6. Per contra, Mr. B.G. Sridharan, learned Standing Counsel for A.P.M.C., states that Section 8 is a non obstante clause and it provides for a bar for any local authority in establishing, authorising or continuing or allowing to establish any place in the market area for the marketing of any notified agricultural produce. He also states that after the amendment of the proviso to Section 8 of the KAPMR Act, by Act 17 of 1980, the Village Panchayat has no right to levy market fee on the sale price of cattle, sheeps and goats which were exempted earlier. According to him, the right to establish a market and a right to collect fee has been taken away in terms of the Amendment Act 17 of 1980. He states that in an identical circumstances, this Court in Village Panchayat, Naganoor v Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Shorapur and Others , upheld the right of the A.P.M.C., in collecting fee on the sale price of cattle in a market, fair or jatra. After hearing learned Counsel for either side, I pass the following order.
7. Petitioner is admittedly Grama Panchayat and the said Panchayat is governed by the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. Section 199 of the said Act provides for levy of taxes, rate, etc., by Grama Panchayats. Section 200 provides for recovery of taxes and other dues. The Panchayat Raj Act further provide for 'Market' means a place for the sale of goods or animals publicly exposed where ordinarily or periodically at least four shops, stalls or sheds are set up or where at least ten animals are brought for sale,
8. The material facts narrated in the writ petition would show that, what the petitioner wants to do is, to collect fees in respect of the catties, sheeps and goats in the market area. The petitioner's contention cannot be accepted in view of non obstante clause in terms of Section 8 of the A.P.M.C. Act. A.P.M.C. Act is a special Act providing for a levy of fee under the Act in respect of the marketing done in the market area in respect of the notified agricultural produce in the market area. Admittedly, the A.P.M.C., has established sub-market, which is a market area as understood under the Act. Section 8 (proviso) reads as follow:--
"After the amendment of the proviso to Section 8 of the KAPMR Act, by Act 17 of 1980, the Village Panchayat has no right to levy market fee on the sale price of cattle in a market, fair or jatra".
It is a non obstante provision providing for a prohibition for any local authority in either establishing or marketing in respect of any notified Agricultural produce and the proviso of Section 8 is further clear to show that the local authority may establish or continue any place for retail sale of any notified agricultural produce other than cattle, sheep and goats, subject to the condition that no market functionary shall operate in such place except in accordance with the provisions of the A.P.M.C. Act.
9. In the present case, admittedly, the petitioner wants to carry on the marketing in the market area in respect of cattle, sheep and goats. The same is prohibited under Section 8 of the Act. In view of Section 8, I am of the view that the petitioner has no right to levy or collect the fee in respect of the cattle in the market area. I may usefully refer to the judgment of this Court in Village Panchayat, Naganoor, supra. The said judgment is a complete answer to the submission made by the petitioner. Paras 6, 7 and 8 of the said judgment is to the following effect.-
6. Before I examine the correctness of the contention urged for the petitioner, I must refer to the relevant provisions of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 (the "KAPMR Act"). Under that Act, the Taluk of Shorapur has been declared to be the market area. The territorial jurisdiction of the petitioner-Panchayat inevitably falls within the limits of the market area. Respondent 1, the Market Committee is concerned only with the notified agricultural produce, but the agricultural produce defined under that Act includes also livestock, cattle, sheep and poultry. They now form part of the schedule as incorporated by Karnataka Act 17 of 1980. Section 7 of the KAPMR Act provides for establishment of markets for regulating of notified agricultural produce in the market area. Section 8 as originally stood provided that after the market was established, no local authority shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any law establish authorise or continue any place in the market area for the marketing of any notified agricultural produce. The proviso thereunder, however, permitted the local authority to establish a market for retail sale of any notified agricultural produce, subject to certain conditions. But that proviso came to be amended by Karnataka Act 17 of 1980 as follows:
"In Section 8 of the principal Act in the proviso to clause (a) of the sub-section (1), after the words 'agricultural produce' the words 'other than cattle, sheep and goats' shall be inserted".
This amendment has thus brought about a radical change. It has totally deprived of the local authority like the Panchayat, the power to establish or use any place even for a retail sale of cattle, sheep and goats.
7. Coming back to the contention of Sri Raikote, that the Panchayat Committee has got the power to levy tax on fairs, festivals and entertainments and also levy fees on markets under Section 73(4) of the KVP and LB Act, it is seen that what has been authorised by Section 73(4) is only to collect the tax on fairs, festivals and entertainments at the rates not exceeding those specified in Schedule I and also fees on Markets. Schedule I under the said Act (see Clause VII-D) authorises the maximum levy of tax of Rs. 20/- on fairs, festivals and entertainments. But that is not what the Panchayat is trying to collect in the present case and that levy, if I may say so, is kept untouched by the provisions of the KAPMR Act. A fee on markets which the Panchayat is empowered to collect under Section 73(4) of the KVP and LB Act is quite different from the market fee which is liable to be collected under Section 65(1) of the KAPMR Act. The former is on markets or the establishment thereof; the later is in respect of the agricultural produce bought or sold in the market area. One has nothing to do with the other.
8. As seen earlier, when the Panchayat has no jurisdiction to establish or continue the market for the sale of cattle, sheep or goats, it necessarily follows that it has no jurisdiction either to levy fees in respect of the sale of the said livestock".
10. The ruling of this Court in the above judgment is binding on me. This Court in an identical circumstances, ruled that the petitioner has no jurisdiction to levy fee or collect the same in respect of the sale of livestock, including cattle, sheep and goats etc. In the circumstances, I do not find any justification in the contentions urged by the petitioner. No other contention is urged before me.
11. In the result, the writ petition fails and it is dismissed. But without any order to costs.