MIS. KUMAON SEEDS COPRN. & ORS.versusKRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, KASHIPUR & ORS.

                             [2011] 3 S.C.R. 718


    A            MIS. KUMAON SEEDS COPRN. & ORS.
                                       v.
          KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, KASHIPUR & ORS.
                   (Civil Appeal No(s). 3630 of 2007)

                              MARCH 03, 2011
    B
        [MARKANDEY KATJU AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.]

              Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964 -
        Certified seeds - Market fee - Levy of - Issuance of show
    C   cause notices by market Committee to dealer in certified
        seeds with regard to imposition of market fee on seeds - Suits
        filed challenging the show cause notices - Dismissed by High
I
         Court - On appeal, held: High Court while dealing only with
         the validity of the show cause notices made certain
    D    observations even. on merits of the matter, which was not
        justified - After the High Court upheld the validity of the show
         cause notices, the Market Committee did not fix any date, time
         and place for the hearing of the dealers in response to the
         show cause notices but straightaway proceeded to issue
    E    notices directing the dealers to pay the market fee on certified
         seeds which was not justified - There was violation of the
         principles of natural justice - Thus, such notices set aside -
         Market Committees permitted to issue fresh notices to the
         dealers fixing the date, time and place for the hearing to the
    F    show cause notices and on that date they can file their
         response and any other material which they wish to produce
         and only thereafter, the Market Committees can decide the
         matter by a reasoned order - Principles of natural justice.

          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
    G 3630 of 2007 etc.

          From the Judgment & Order dated 07.07.2005 of the High
      Court of Judicature of Utaranchal, at Nainital, in First Appeal
      No. 1073 of 2001.
    H                             718
     KUMAON SEEDS COPRN. & ORS. v. KRISHI                   719
     UTPADAN MANDI SAMIT!, KASHIPUR & ORS.
                                WITH                                A
 Civil Appeal No. 3631 of 2007.
            ;

     P.S. Patwalia, Vibha Datta Makhija for the Appellants.

     Sudhir Chandra, Rachana S~ivastava for the Respondents.        B
                                       .   •·
     The following order of the Court was delivered

                          ORDER

     Heard learned counsel :for the appearing parties.              C

      These Appeals have been filed against the impugned
  common judgment of the High Court of Uttarachal (Now, the
. High Court of Uttarakhand) dated 07.07.2005 passed in First
  Appeal No. 1072 of 2001 and First Appeal No. 1073 of 2001.        D

     The· appellants claim to be dealing in certified seeds.
 Seeking to impose market fee on those seeds under the Uttar
 Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964, the
 respondents issued show cause notices to the appellants. The
 appellants filed civil suits challenging the said show cause       E
 notices and the matter went upto the High Court which
 dismissed the suits by the impugned judgment.

      In our opinion, the High Court should not have gone into
 the merits of the matter because it was only dealing with the      F
 validity o1 the show cause notices in question and not deciding
 the matter on merits. However, it appears that certain
 observations have been made even on the merits of the case
 by the High Court in the impugned judgment, which, in our
 opinion, was not justified.
                                                                    G
       After the High Court upheld the validity of the show eause
 notices, the concerned Market Committees should then have
 issued notices to the appellants fixing a date, time and place
 for the hearing of the appellants in response to that show cause
 notices, and in that hearing, the appellants should have been      H
    720       SUPREME COURT REPORTS               (2011) 3 S.C.R.

A allowed to appear either in-person or through their
  representatives and permitted to file their objections and any
  other material which they wished to produce and only thereafter
  should the matter have been decided, one way or the other, by
  the Market Committees concerned, by a reasoned order after
B considering the response of the appellants as well as the other
  material.

         It appears that the above procedure was not followed and,
    hence, in our opinion, there was violation of the principles of
    natural justice.
c
       After the impugned judgment of the High Court, the
  concerned Market Committees never fixed any date, time and
  place for the hearing of the appellants in response to the show
  cause notices but straightaway it proceeded to issue notices
D dated 27.07.2005 directing the appellants to pay the market
  fee on certified seeds which, in our opinion, was not justified.
  Hence, we set aside the notices dated 27.07.2005 but we
  permit the Market Committees concerned to issue fresh notices
  to the appellants fixing therein the date, time and place for the
E hearing of the appellants to the show cause notices, and on that
  date the appellants can file their response and also produce
  any other material which they wish to produce and only
  thereafter the Market Committees concerned can proceed to
  decide the matter by a reasoned order uninfluenced by any
F observations made by the High Court in the impugned
  judgment.
       We make it clear that we are not making any comment on
  the merits of the controversy. We leave it open to the concerned
  authorities to decide the matter after hearing the appellants as
G directed above.
           The Appeals are disposed of accordingly. No costs.
    N.J.                                    Appeals disposed of.
H