YASHWANTRAI JOSHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner Shri Yashwantrai Joshi Cooperative Agriculture Producing Processing and Marketing Society Ltd., has prayed for an appropriate writ, order and direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 11.6.2010 passed by respondent No. 1 confirming the order passed by the respondent No. 2 dated 19.1.2010 as well as letter dated 15.2.2010, which came to be confirmed by respondent No. 1.

(2.) The short question which is posed for consideration of this Court whether the petitioner society which is engaged in the business of pooling cotton from members and thereafter processes it and supplies it to cotton federation and cotton union is liable to pay market cess on the same ?

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner society is registered as Cooperative Agriculture Producing, Processing and Marketing Society Ltd and it pools cotton from its members and processes it and thereafter supplies it to the cotton federation or cotton union and whatever profits are thereby obtained, are disbursed to its members. It is the case of the petitioner that it has obtained the license of the Hasot Market Committee as a trader. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner society is a member of South Gujarat Cooperative Market Union Ltd and it supplies, processed and unprocessed agriculture produce to the federation/union for its sale. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner society merely procures goods from its member societies and supplies it to the federation or sells it through federation/cotton union to the traders but all the activities are carried out through federation/cotton union and therefore, the petitioner society is not liable to pay the market cess. That despite the same, respondent market committee issued the notice to the petitioner society on 31.3.2008 to pay the cess/fees, to which the society replied by reply dated 2.4.2008 stating that the society is only engaged in the business of pooling the agriculture produce and after processing the same, supplies the same to Federation and therefore, as such there is no sale by the petitioner society at all and therefore, it is not required to pay market cess/fees. It is the case of the petitioner that despite the same, respondent market committee has time and again issued various notices for the recovery. That thereafter, the market committee made representations to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and even thereafter, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 asked the petitioner society to show cause as to why cess/fess be not recovered. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner society tried to convince the authorities but respondent No. 3 passed order dated 19.1.2010 and thereafter by communication dated 15.2.2010 respondent No. 3 has directed the petitioner to pay up the cess/fees or else it will recover from the members of the managing committee. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the same, the petitioner society preferred Revision Application No.55 of 2010 before respondent No. 1 challenging the order dated 19.1.2010 passed by respondent No. 2, which came to be rejected by the order dated 11.7.2010. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid decision and action of the respondent market committee directing and/or calling upon the petitioner society to pay market cess, the petitioner has preferred present Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.