THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU Writ Petition No.3089 of 2005 ORDER: Under the impugned order, dated 18.01.2005, the petitioner was directed to pay market fee on the consignment sale of cotton seeds from 2001-02 to 2003-04, within seven days from the date of the notice, failing which, necessary action will be initiated. While admitting the writ petition, on 29.04.2005, this Court granted interim stay subject to the petitioner depositing half of the market fee as per proceedings, dated 13.08.2004, of the Agricultural Market Committee, Bhainsa, within a period of four weeks. The learned counsel for the petitioner asserted that the said order has already been complied with. According to the petitioner, the traders to whom it has supplied the cotton seeds located out of the State are identifiable and in fact, a list of such traders is being furnished from time to time and instead of collecting the market fee from the said people, a demand is raised against the petitioner, which is arbitrary and illegal. It is stated that the subject matter of this writ petition was also the subject matter of W.P.Nos.8387 and 8412 of 2003, which were disposed of on 16.07.2004 with the following direction: “Having regard to the fact that the petitioners have already furnished the details of quantity of sale and consignment being transported from their respective premises, including that of the particulars of the purchasers, the respondents-Market Committee is at liberty to make an enquiry and can pass appropriate orders including that of assessment of the market fee and by specifying the persons who are liable to pay the market fee. Until the assessment is done in respect of the cotton seed, which were already sold to the lincencees, without prior permission of the market committee, the petitioners shall not move the cotton seeds by way of consignment or otherwise outside the market area.” It is stated that though all the details were furnished by the petitioner as to the addresses and quantities of purchases made to the traders outside the State, the respondents have not taken any action and on the other hand, issued the impugned notice. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner has neither annexed the said details to the writ petition nor he has furnished any such copy at the time of arguing this writ petition. Under those circumstances, without expressing any opinion on merits, the petitioner is directed to furnish the list of the traders located outside the State, to whom, it had supplied cotton seeds, their names, addresses and other details, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt a copy of this order. On furnishing such information, the third respondent shall verify and pass an appropriate order as per law, within a period of eight weeks thereafter. Till such time, status quo as on today shall be maintained. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _______________ (C.V. RAMULU,J) Date: 27.01.2011 VGB