Civil Writ Petition No.10384 of 1993 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1. Civil Writ Petition No.10384 of 1993 Date of decision: 2.12.2010 M/s Mohan Lal Thapar & brothers and others ..Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ..Respondents. 2. Civil Writ Petition No.3316 of 1994 M/s Chetan Rice Mills and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents 3. Civil Writ Petition No. 8869 of 1994 M/s R.S. Rice & General Mills and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents 4. Civil Writ Petition No.11899 of 1993 M/s Chaudhary Rice and Oil Mills and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents Civil Writ Petition No.10384 of 1993 -2- **** CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Sanjiv Walia, Advocate for the petitioners None for the respondents **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J ( Oral) This order will dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos.10384, 11899 of 1993, 3316 and 8689 of 1994 as common questions are involved in all these petitions. In Civil Writ Petition No.10384 of 1993 declaration is sought that the amount of Rural Development Fund payable under the provisions of Rural Development Act, 1987 is not liable to be included in the taxable turn over for the liability to pay sales/purchase tax under the provisions of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. Other petitions are identical. Case of the petitioners is that they are registered dealers under the provisions of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961 and while buying or selling agricultural produce they pay market fee and also on the same pattern they pay Rural Development Fund as per 1987 Act. The amount of market fee and Rural Development Fund could not be treated as part of sales/purchase price of the goods. Since the authorities under the 1948 Act were not accepting this plea, the petitioners have filed this petition. Civil Writ Petition No.10384 of 1993 -3- **** At the time of admission, the following order was passed:- “The point involved in this writ petition is whether the Rural Development Fund fee is includable in the taxable turn over. On the question, whether market is so includable stands covered by a decision in Gurandittamal Shanti Parkash V. State of Punjab, 1993(2) P.L.R. 185 (D.B.). We understand that almost 100 and odd writ petitions stand admitted on this point and they can be conveniently disposed of now. We, therefore, direct the Registry to list all such writ petitions for final hearing for 14.1.1994 along with all such writ petitions in which notice of motion has been issued by various Benches of this Court. This writ petition is admitted and ordered to be listed in terms of the above order.” We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. None appeared on behalf of the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as already noticed in the admission order the matter is covered by judgment of this Court in Gurandittamal Shanti Parkash's case which has later been affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in 136 STC 12 State of Punjab Vs. Gurandittamal Shanti Parkash. In view of earlier judgment of this Court in Gurandittamal Shanti Parkash's which has been affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court, we have to allow these writ petitions to the extent of holding Civil Writ Petition No.10384 of 1993 -4- **** that amount of market fee and Rural Development Funds are not to be included in the taxable turnover. The petitions are disposed of accordingly. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge December 02,2010 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Pka Judge