Steel City Food Products Private Ltd. vs The Agriculture Produce Market Committee and Assessment Sub Committee

R.K. Merathia, J.—Mr. Agrawal, learned Counsel appearing for all the Petitioners submitted that the impugned orders of assessment were passed without giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners and, therefore, the orders and the demands made pursuant thereto are bad.

On the other hand, Mr. V.P. Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the Respondents, on the basis of the records of the department, submitted that on notice the representatives of the Petitioners appeared and produced documents and on that basis orders were passed but on the date of passing of the orders nobody was present on behalf of the Petitioners. Mr. Singh, fairly submitted that the Petitioners may be given opportunity of hearing.

It is not disputed that the Petitioners have notice about the assessment proceeding.

In the circumstances, the Petitioners will appear before the Respondent No. 2-Assessment Sub-Committee, Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Seraikella-Kharsawan on or before 9th May 2011. The Assessment Sub-Committee will fix a date(s) and will pass a fresh reasoned order after giving opportunity to produce documents and hearing to the parties and in accordance with law as early as possible and preferably within two months from the date of appearance of the Petitioners. The parties are directed to cooperate in early disposal of the case.

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merit of the respective cases of the parties.

With these observations and directions, all these writ petitions stand disposed of.