‘Licence Fee Cannot be Imposed Retrospectively’: Allahabad HC Highlights Failure to Follow Due Procedure By Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad
The Allahabad High Court observed that the Licence fee cannot be imposed retrospectively but from the date of grant of the licence.
The Court stated that any penalty that may be sought to be imposed for want of licence can be imposed in due course after the following procedure.
The bench of Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Jayant Banerji observed, “…it bears to reason that license fee cannot be imposed retrospectively but from the day of grant of license. Any penalty that may be sought to be imposed for want of license can be imposed in due course after following due procedure which the respondents have failed to do despite passage of so many years.”
Advocate Nikhil Agrawal appeared for the Appellant and Advocate S.C. Dwivedi appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
The Director Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad initiated steps for the recovery of mandi fees and cess under the Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964. This imposition was challenged by Baba Global Limited in the Writ Petition leading to an interim order directing a stay on the impugned order. The condition was that the petitioner deposit a sum of Rs. 26 Lacs within two weeks and furnish security for the balance amount to the satisfaction of the respondent. Later in the revision, the Director, by an order, held that mandi fees and development cess were not applicable and set aside the impugned order imposing Mandi fees.
The Court noted that after being relegated to the alternative remedy prescribed under Section 25 the Adhiniyam, 1964, the petitioner preferred the revision before the respondent who by its order held that the imposition made against the petitioner using the impugned order was illegal and set aside the same.
The Court stated that despite the direction by the revisional court to the respondents enabling them to recover any amount due to them by way of licence fee etc., no steps have been taken by the respondents to do so since 2010.
The Court stated that the conduct of the respondents of withholding of the security cash amount of Rs. 26 Lacs and not passing an order of discharge of the other securities despite the observation made by the revisional authority, cannot be justified.
Finally, the Court directed the respondents that the cash amount of security of Rs. 26 Lacs be refunded to the petitioner with simple interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the petition.
Cause Title: Baba Global Limited v. Director Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad And Others (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC:76800-DB)
Appearance:
Appellant: Adv. Nishit Agrawal, Adv. Bharat Ji Agrawal and Adv. Nikhil Agrawal
Respondent: S.C. Dwivedi
