DIRECTOR, UTTARAKHAND MANDI PARISHAD Vs. SAHOTA SEED LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This batch of Special Appeals are preferred against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in WPMS No.29 of 2019 and batch dated 05.07.2019. The appellant, in all these cases, are the Mandi Samitis either at Jaspur in District Udham Singh Nagar or in Ramnagar of District Nainital.

(2.) The respondent-writ petitioners had invoked the jurisdiction of this Court seeking a direction to quash the impugned order dated 27.04.2018, in so far as it related to the petitioners; and a writ of mandamus commanding the third respondent to return the amount, which the petitioners had deposited with the third respondent as mandi fees and development cess under protest, along with interest at 12% per annum.

(3.) These cases have a chequered history. Pursuant to the show cause notices issued by Mandi Samitis informing the respondent-writ petitioners that their licenses would not be renewed for non-payment of the mandi fees, the respondent-writ petitioners paid the said amount under protest. The validity of the said levy was subjected to challenge before this Court, and the challenge was upheld, and the provision was struck down as ultra vires, by the learned Single Judge which order was affirmed by the Division Bench. The State legislature, thereafter, amended Section 27 (c)(iii) of the Uttarakhand Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2011 Act"?). The validity of the amended provision was also subjected to challenge before this Court, and both the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench upheld the validity of the provisions, and repelled the challenge thereto by the petitioners therein. On the matter being carried in appeal, the Supreme Court, in "M/s Gujrat Ambuja Exports Ltd. and another vs. State of Uttarakhand and others"?: 2016 (3) SCC 601, struck down the amendment made to Section 27 (c)(iii) of the 2011 Act, and declared the levy of mandi fees to be unconstitutional.