Mandatory declaration requirements must be examined first before market fee recovery where dealers claim belated compliance.

Where exemption from market fee and rural development fund depends on prescribed declarations, the authority must first examine the dealer's evidence of compliance before enforcing recovery. The court noted that the earlier view treating the filing time-limit as merely directory could not survive in light of the Supreme Court's ruling that the requirement is mandatory. However, because the petitioners asserted actual payment and claimed belated submission of the relevant forms, they were entitled to produce supporting material, and the competent authority had to consider that material and determine exemption before any recovery action.

---

---

Issues: Whether the market committee could proceed to recover market fee and rural development fund without first examining the dealers' plea that the prescribed forms had in fact been submitted, though belatedly, and whether the petitioners were entitled to an opportunity to establish their claim for exemption.

Analysis: The Court noted that the earlier view treating the time-limit for filing the prescribed forms as directory could no longer hold good in view of the Supreme Court decision holding the relevant requirement mandatory. At the same time, the record showed that the petitioners asserted actual payment of market fee and claimed to have submitted the prescribed forms, albeit belatedly. In these circumstances, the proper course was not immediate recovery but a prior examination by the competent authority of respondent No. 3 of the evidence relating to submission of forms LL and E and the applicability of exemption in the light of the Supreme Court's ruling.

Conclusion: The petitioners were entitled to produce evidence of submission of the prescribed forms, and respondent No. 3 was required to consider that material before deciding whether market fee and rural development fund could be recovered.

Ratio Decidendi: Where exemption from market fee depends on prescribed declarations and supporting forms, and the dealer asserts actual compliance albeit belatedly, the authority must first examine the evidence and decide the claim in the light of the governing mandatory rule before enforcing recovery.

---