SUBZI MANDI ARTHI ASSOCIATION Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of CWP Nos.6520 of 2008, 17534 of 2009 and COCP No.1100 of 2008. For the sake of convenience, facts are being taken from CWP No.6520 of 2008.

(2.) As per the averments, the Municipal Council, Yamuna Nagar (respondent No.5) constructed 29 shops and 10 booths in the year 1976. Thereafter, in the year 1997-98, respondent No.5 constructed 51 booths measuring 10'x20' for their commercial interest in a new Mandi at some distance from the existing Sabji Mandi. It is averred in the writ petition that in the year 1999, some members of the Sabji Mandi Association apprehensive of the fact that respondents No.3 and 4 might declare the said 51 booths as a part of the existing Sabji Mandi, approached this Court by way of CWP No.8401 of 1999. Respondents No.3 and 4 specifically made a statement that 51 booths were constructed for different purposes and business, and by declaring the said booths to be the part of the existing Sabji Mandi the said purpose would be defeated. In view of the said statement, the aforesaid writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. Thereafter, on 8.10.2001, the matter regarding declaration of 51 booths as a part of the existing Mandi was investigated by the Chief Administrator. It was categorically observed by the Chief Administrator that as per Section 8 (ii) of the Punjab Agriculture Produce Markets Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), no person or Municipal Council, Panchayat Samiti or other bodies can notify the sub yard within 5 kms of where the market is existing. During this period, some of the owners of the said 51 booths filed CWP No.10403 of 2002 seeking directions that the respondents-Marketing Board/Market Committee, Yamuna Nagar to issue licenses to them. The said writ petition was also opposed by respondents No.3 and 4. Ultimately, that writ petition was dismissed on 27.7.2004 with the following observations :-

(3.) On the representation moved by the said persons consequent to the above mentioned order, the impugned notification was issued declaring the area of 51 booths as sub-market yards. In the written statement, the main ground taken is that the area under the aforesaid 51 booths is to be declared as sub-market. It has further been pleaded that the said area has been notified as sub market yard in the exercise of powers conferred under Section 7(2) of the Act. Section 7 of the Act is reproduced herein below :-