MELA AKORHI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 18 -7 -2001 (Annexure -1), passed by the Managing Director of the Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board (respondent No. 3), in Appeal Petition No. 2 of 2000, under Sec. 129(V) of the Bihar Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The appeal was directed against the order dated 21 -9 -2000 (Annexure -28), passed by the Secretary, Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Mohania (respondent No. 12), whereby the application of respondent No. 15 (Vijay Sen Singh) to hold a cattle fair known as Vijay Virat Pashu Mela on his Raiyati land for the period 2000 -2001 was rejected.

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 15 was earlier granted licence for holding Mela for sale and purchase of cattle since 1 -10 -1996 on his Raiyati land bearing plot Nos. 323 & 324, Khata No. 173. Respondent No. 15. was granted licence to hold the Mela for three days a week namely, Friday, Saturday and Sunday, apart from six occasions every year between the period 1 -4 -1999 for 31 -3 -2000. There was allegation against him that he was holding the Mela for more than the permissible days and was depriving the Committee of its legitimate revenue. This led to suspension of the licence for a period of one month by an order dated 24 -6 -1999, but he was found to be holding Mela in defence of such order of suspension which led to the order of cancellation of licence dated 7 -8 - 1999. By order dated 7 -8 -1999 of respondent No. 12, the licence of respondent No. 15 to hold the Mela between 1 -4 -1999 to 31 -3 -2000 was cancelled which was affirmed by the appellate authority on 16 -11 -1999. The same was challenged before this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 11448 of 1999, which was dismissed by order dated 6 -12 -1999 (Annexure -22). Respondent No. 15 herein challenged the same by preferring L.P.A. No. 43 of 2000 which was allowed by order dated 1 -2 -2000 (Annexure - 23), passed by a Division Bench of this Court, whereby the aforesaid orders dated 7 -8 -1999 and 16. -11 -1999, passed by the authorities under the Act, were set aside. The matter was remitted back to respondent No. 12 to pass a fresh order after supplying a copy of a particular report which was not supplied to him. The sole ground on which the appeal was allowed by the Division Bench was that on account of non -supply of a certain report adverse to respondent No. 15, he had suffered prejudice, inasmuch as he could not challenge the position that the said report was not with respect to the Mela of respondent No. 15. It was further directed that till the matter is decided by respondent No. 12, respondent No. 15 shall not hold the Mela in question. Pursuant to the order in L.P.A. No. 43 of 2000, respondent No. 12 passed the order dated 7 -3 -2000 (Annexure -24), whereby he held that the said report related to the Mela of respondent No. 15 and reiterated the earlier order of cancellation. It is relevant to state that the matter relating to cancellation of the licence for the period 1 -4 -1999 to 31 -3 -2000 rested with this order and attained finality. In other words, the adverse findings have remained intact and have become final.

(3.) PURSUANT to the order of the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 1023 of 2000, respondent No. 12 passed the order dated 21 -9 -2000 (Annexure -28), whereby the application of respondent No. 15 for grant of licence to hold the cattle fair on his Raiyati land has been rejected on the ground that he had contravened the terms of the licence of the previous period by holding cattle fair every day. Respondent No. 15 had continued to hold Mela during the period of suspension of licence in defiance of the order and had also deprived the Committee of its lawful revenue. Respondent No. 15. has been defaulter in payment of the dues. Madhuban Virat Pashu Mela is held at a distance of 3 kms. which is in contravention of the Board 'sletter No. 6075, dated 3 -11 -1999; It is also stated in the order that the Committee earns revenue of Rs. 70,000.00 per year, whereas the income from Vijay Virat Pashu Mela is Rs. 30,000.00 per year. In that view of the matter, respondent No. 15 is not a "desirable person" within the meaning of Rule 129 of the Rules, and the application for grant of licence for the period 2000 -2001 has been rejected. Respondent No. 15 appealed which has been disposed of by the impugned order dated 18 -7 -2000 (Annexure -1).