Disposed

Ramesh R.Patel and Co. v. State

Orissa HC15 Mar 2019WP(C)/9570/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of the writ petition relying on a common order dated 23.10.2017 in a batch of connected writ petitions. The petition is disposed of in terms of the earlier order declaring market fee collection illegal subject to verification by opposite party authorities.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of in terms of common order dated 23.10.2017 in OJC No. 7801 of 1995 subject to verification.

Ramesh R.Patel and Co. Vs State — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2019)

¶1

W.P.(C) No. 9570 of 2007

¶2

15.03.2019

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶4

It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the common order dated 23.10.2017 passed by this Court in OJC No.7801 of 1995 and a batch of writ petitions. The common order dated 23.10.2017 reads as under:

¶5

“ Heard Sri A.Pal, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Government Advocate appearing for the State-opposite parties, Sri S.K.Patnaik, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd. and Sri P.K.Mohanty, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective Regulated Market Committees and have perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the parties have jointly stated that the issue involved in these writ petitions is squarely covered by the decision of this Court rendered in the case of M/s. Sriniwas Trading Company and others vs. State of Orissa and others, 2017(Supp.-I) OLR 628 .

¶7

Learned counsel for the parties have jointly prayed that these writ petitions may also be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment.

¶8

Accordingly, for the reasons given in the aforesaid judgment in the case of M/s. Sriniwas Trading Company (supra ), it is directed that the collection of market fee on Kendu leaves from the petitioners is held to be illegal and devoid of jurisdiction and the Regulated Market Committees are directed not to collect the same. It is further directed that the opposite parties-Regulated Market Committees shall refund the market fee collected so far from the petitioners within a period of four months from the date of filing a certified copy of the judgment, failing which the same shall be refunded with interest of 9% per annum from the date of collection till the date of actual payment.

¶9

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petitions stand disposed of.

¶10

-2-

¶11

Let a copy of this judgment be placed on the record of the connected writ petitions.”

¶12

Accordingly, this writ petition is also disposed of in terms of above quoted common order dated 23.10.2017 passed in OJC No. 7801 of 1995 subject to verification by the opposite partyauthorities.

¶13

It will be open for the opposite parties to file appropriate application, if the case of the petitioner is not covered by the above quoted order.

¶14

Misc. Cases/I.As. connected to this writ petition, if any, are accordingly disposed of.

¶15

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶16

.…….......……………… ( K.S. Jhaveri ) Chief Justice

¶17

…………………..……… (P. Patnaik) Judge

¶18

SKG/MP

Ramesh R.Patel and Co. v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh R.Patel and Co. v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sk.Tasawar Vs Registrarjudicial

Ashok Kumar Swain Vs Union of India

Sankarshan Panigrahi Vs State

A.P.S.B.Minerals Vs Secretary Keonjhar Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

M/S.Mass Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd. Vs Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax

United Bank of India Vs Narendra Ku.Rout,Dist.Magistrate