SITA RAM MOTILAL AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed that the respondents may be restrained from taking any action against him under the provisions of the Rajasthan Agricultural Market Produce Act, 1961 and Rules framed there under (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1961) and has also prayed that Bye -law 2(7) framed by the respondent No.2 i.e. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Shivganj may be declared as ultra vires, of the Act. Lastly, it is prayed that the respondent No. 2 may be directed to release the account books of the petitioner seized by the respondents.

(2.) PETITIONER is carrying on his business as a retail trader in food -grains, oil -seeds, sugar, cloth etc. at village Gohili, Panchayat Samiti, Sirohi for more than the last 40 years. The said village is situated within the area of Panchayat Samiti, Sirohi. By Notification dated 21st April, 1977, which was published in the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated 28th April, 1977, the State of Rajasthan issued a Notification under section 4 of the Act of 1961 stating therein that the area comprising of Panchayat Samiti, Shivganj and Municipal Board areas of Shivganj and Sirohi shall fall in the market areas of the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Shivganj. However, by another Notification dated January 2, 1979, which was published on 18th January, 1979 in the Rajasthan Rajpatra, whereby the boundaries of the sub -market yards at Sirohi town and villages Jaiwal, Kalandri and Las was ear -marked. Petitioner's village was of -course not declared as sub -market yeard nor it was included in the principal market yard of submarket yard. It is submitted that the petitioner is a retailer and he is not requires to take a license. The petitioner challenges to validity of the Bye -laws 2(6) and 2(7) framed by respondent No.2 as being ultra vires of section 2(xiv) of the Act of 1961. It is also contended that the petitioner is a retailer, therefore, he is not requires to take a licence under Explanation to sub -section 2 of Section 4 of the Act.

(3.) WE have heard both the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the respondents and also perused the record. In order to resolve the controversy Involved in this writ petition, it would be necessary to reproduce the definition of Retail Sale' as defined In section 2(xiv) of the Act of 1961, which reads as under: Section 2(xiv) - Retail Sale: 'Retail Sale' means a sale of any agricultural produce not exceeding such quantity as may be determined by bye -laws made under section 37 or section 38, to be a retail sale in respect of such agricultural produce; The Bye -laws 2(6) & 2(7) framed by the market Committee also read as under: .........[vernacular ommited text]...........