IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19902 of 2004 Between : M/s. Avanti Feeds Limited,' Rep. by its Finance Manager, P. Sivanand, S/o. Raja Rao, aged 40 Yearsm D.No. 6-3-658, B2 Concorde Apartments, Somjiguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND The Secretary, Agricultural Market Committee, Kothapeta, East Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the proceedings bearing ROC No. 180/02, dated 13-10-2004 of the Respondent Market Committee, demanding for production of records to reassess the market fee for the year 1998-99 and also demanding for payment of the market fee in contrary to Section 12-B (5) of A.P. (Agricultural Produce & Livestock) Market, Act, 1966 as illegal, arbitrary, erroneous, without jurisdiction, ultravires and barred by limitation and consequently direct the Respondent not to insist the petitioner to pay the market fee or to produce the Accounts Books of the year 1998-99 Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.Y.V.RAVI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent : MR.K.MADHAVA REDDY (SC FOR AGRL.MRKT.COMTTS) The Court made the following : ORDER : The petitioner has questioned the notice, dated 13th of October, 2004, issued in Proceedings bearing ROC. No.180/02, by the Agricultural Market Committee, Kothapet. 2. In the aforesaid notice, the petitioner was asked to produce the books of account for the purpose of assessing the market fee. In the impugned notice, it is indicated that steps will be taken to prosecute the petitioner, in case of failing to comply with the same. 3. Though the impugned notice is questioned on several grounds, but it is to be noticed that it is only a show cause notice for production of certain record. Asmuch as the jurisdiction of respondent is not in dispute to issue the impugned notice and conducting inquiry, I do not find any merit in this writ petition to interdict the proceedings at this stage. 4. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is permitted to file his objections to the notice, within a period of eight weeks from today. Upon filing of such objections, it is equally open for the respondent/Market Committee to take further steps in accordance with law. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 26th June 2009 N.B: Furnish copy in one week. (b/o) ajr