Govt has decided to legislate to replace agricultural produce market committee law, SHC told

The Sindh government has decided to draft a new law in place of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee Act 1939 and the Sindh Wholesale Agricultural Produce Markets (development and regulations) Act, 2010, the additional agriculture secretary told the Sindh High Court (SHC) on Thursday.

During the hearing of a petition filed by the Karachi Vegetable Traders Welfare Federation against the constitution of the market committee, the additional agriculture secretary submitted that the purpose of the promulgation of the new law was to cover all the aspects of the marketing system and protect interests of the stakeholders.

To a court query on how much time the government would take to promulgate the new law, the officer submitted that since it had been decided to make a new law, it would take certain time to place a draft of the new law for vetting by the law department and thereafter it would be placed before the cabinet and the provincial assembly for approval.

He submitted that presently the market committee had been constituted under the provision of the Agriculture Produce Markets Act and the applicable rules.

A division bench of the SHC headed by Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar observed that the Agriculture Produce Markets Act provided that the government shall establish a market committee for every notified market area and issue a notification accordingly whereas the Section 6 of the same Act provided that the committee which shall consist of nine or sixteen members as the minister for agriculture may in each case determine.

The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the market committee was notified in violation of the Rule 8 of the agriculture produce markets rules as it was clearly expounded that the panel in respect of growers and consumers shall be finalised in consultation with the respective associations if any and the representative of the bureau of supply and price. Besides, the government may after such an inquiry as deemed fit select the required number of persons from the panel of appointment as members.

The respondents’ counsel submitted that at the time of constituting of market committee, the present petitioners were under litigation with the market committee and some adverse allegations had been levelled against them and they also encroached upon some land therefore they were not required to be called for any consultation or joining the market committee.

The high court, after hearing the arguments of the counsel, observed that the petitioner’s association was a registered association of traders and in all fairness at the time of making the inquiry for the selection of required number of persons of the committee, the association should have been called for their point of view which had not been done in the case.

The SHC directed the agriculture secretary to call the petitioner’s representative and respondents’ representative and after providing ample opportunity of hearing to them, the matter may be decided whether at the time of issuance of notification, the petitioners’ association was required to be consulted or they were already consulted in terms of the Section 8 of the agricultural produce market rules and thereafter pass appropriate orders. The bench directed the agriculture secretary to complete the exercise within one month.