THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 13th August 2009 WRIT APPEAL NO.1513 of 2002 Between: S.Narender Reddy, S/o.Ram Reddy, 42 years, Prop.M/s.Narendra Traders, Jogipet, r/o.Jogipet, Medak District. …APPELLANT AND 1. The Agricultural Market Committee, Jogipet, through its person Incharge/Secretary at Jogipet, Medak District. And three others. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.1513 of 2002 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Sanjay Kumar) The appellant, who is the petitioner in W.P.No.10099 of 1991, filed this Writ Appeal aggrieved by the order dated 22.03.2002. The learned Single Judge held that the demand for payment of market fee made by the respondent-Agricultural Market Committee, Jogipet, Medak District, for the assessment year 1985-86 was not in consonance with the provisions of Section 12-B of the A.P. (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 {“the Act of 1966” for brevity}, but held that the similar demand for the years 1986- 87, 1987-88 and 1988-89 was valid and proper being in consonance with the statutory provision. Stating so, the learned Judge held that the recovery of the market fee for the said years could be affected under the Revenue Recovery Act, 1864. The appellant/writ petitioner is aggrieved by the direction aforestated in respect of the years 1986-89. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the learned Judge failed to deal with substantial contention raised by his client that the respondent-Market Committee had unilaterally arrived at the amount payable by his client without determining the same after issuing a show cause notice to his client and affording him an opportunity of hearing. The material on record shows that the respondent-Market Committee resorted to recovery of the market fee allegedly due from the appellant for the period in question and got issued the distrained order dated 16.07.1991 through the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Andole Mandal, Medak District, under the Revenue Recovery Act, 1864, without first resorting to assessment and determination of the dues of the appellant. Such an exercise under Section 12-B of the Act of 1966 would necessarily require the involvement of the appellant, whereby he would have been put on notice and given an opportunity of hearing before the final determination was made as to the amounts due from him towards market fee. In the absence of such a determination duly adhering to the statutory procedure and the principles of natural justice, the action initiated by the Market Committee by straight away taking recourse to the Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 and getting issued a Distrained order through the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Andole Mandal, Medak District, is clearly unsustainable. The learned Judge, therefore, erred in setting aside the demand for only one year on the ground that it is time barred, without dealing with this issue. The Writ Appeal is accordingly allowed setting aside the order of the learned Judge impugned in this appeal and also the impugned order dated 16.07.1991 issued by the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Andole Mandal, Medak District, demanding an amount of Rs.1,47,864/- {Rupees one lakh forty seven thousand eight hundred and sixty four only} from the appellant for the years 1985-86 to 1988- 89. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) _________________ (SANJAY KUMAR, J) 13th August 2009 RRB