1993 (3) TMI 377 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of the definition of 'agricultural produce' under the Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act.
2. Determination of whether 'Zarda' falls under the definition of 'agricultural produce' for market fee purposes.
3. Consideration of the amended definition of 'agricultural produce' effective from April 30, 1982.
4. Decision on the refund of market fees paid by the respondent-firm during the legal proceedings.

Analysis:
The Supreme Court heard an appeal from the Patna High Court's judgment quashing a market fee demand under the Bihar Agricultural Produce Markets Act. The appellant-market committee sought market fee payment from the respondent-firm for the sale of Zarda, claiming it fell under the 'tobacco' category. The High Court accepted the writ petition challenging this demand. The definition of 'agricultural produce' was crucial, including all produce specified in the Schedule. An amended definition broadened the scope to include manufacturing aspects, effective from April 30, 1982, though not argued by the appellant before the High Court.

The High Court's judgment considered 'Zarda' as a variety of manufactured tobacco, a view uncontested by the appellant's counsel. The appellant sought relief post the 1982 amendment, acknowledging the High Court's reasoning. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's judgment until April 30, 1982, leaving the period thereafter open for future litigation. The Court refrained from opining on the 'manufacture' aspect, emphasizing the relief's scope till the amendment date.

Regarding the refund of market fees, interim orders required monthly deposits by the respondent-firm pending the writ petition. The High Court's judgment made these deposits refundable. However, the Supreme Court's special leave order allowed retention of the collected amount pending appeal, with refund instructions if the appeal failed. The division of the High Court's judgment operability did not affect the refund orders, which the market committee must comply with, including interest at 12% per annum. The appeal was partially allowed, with each party bearing their costs.