IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 1859 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: March 5, 2009 Tilda Riceland Pvt. Ltd. ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. BHALLA Present: Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Advocate, for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. The instant petition is directed against order dated 14.1.2009 (P-24), passed by the Chief Administrator-respondent No. 2 rejecting the appeal of the petitioner, filed under Section 40 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) read with Rule 31(13)(i) of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets (General) Rules, 1962 (for brevity, ‘the Rules’), impugning orders of the Assessing Authority, dated 21.11.2007 and 7.1.2008. The Appellate Authority has refused to entertain the appeal in the absence of pre-deposit of the demanded amount of Market Fee as well C.W.P. 1859 of 2009 (O&M) as Rural Development Fund. 2. It has not been disputed that there is no requirement of pre-deposit of Rural Development Fund although such a requirement exist under Rule 31(13)(i) of the Rules for deposit of Market Fee read with Section 40 of the Act. The petitioner has been non-suited on the ground that pre-deposit has not been made. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at a considerable length and are of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is asked to furnish a bank guarantee equivalent to the Market Fee, to the satisfaction of the Assessing Authority, which shall be taken as sufficient compliance of Rule 31 (13)(i) of the Rules read with Section 40 of the Act. The needful shall be done within a period of two weeks and thereafter on the production of necessary documents the Appellate Authority shall proceed to decide the appeal on merit. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 14.1.2009 (P-24) is set aside. We are further of the view that since the petitioner has approached this Court on earlier two occasions, the Appellate Authority would decide the appeal expeditiously preferably within a period of three months. 4. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (H.S. BHALLA) March 5, 2009 JUDGE Pkapoor 2