https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187598 The Court upheld the market-regulation scheme under the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing Act, confirming that the power to establish a market includes the power to discontinue it at one place and shift it elsewhere by notification, and that localisation of marketing is a reasonable supervisory measure. Rule 5 was held consistent with Section 6 because the Act and Rules form a coherent code requiring notified produce to be sold in the established market and not elsewhere in the market area. Trader-to-trader dealings and produce imported from outside the area were held to remain within the regulatory ambit. The challenged market-area and market-yard notifications were also sustained, as they were legislative in character and not shown to be unreasonable. en-us Tue, 17 Feb 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:25:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187598 The Court upheld the market-regulation scheme under the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing Act, confirming that the power to establish a market includes the power to discontinue it at one place and shift it elsewhere by notification, and that localisation of marketing is a reasonable supervisory measure. Rule 5 was held consistent with Section 6 because the Act and Rules form a coherent code requiring notified produce to be sold in the established market and not elsewhere in the market area. Trader-to-trader dealings and produce imported from outside the area were held to remain within the regulatory ambit. The challenged market-area and market-yard notifications were also sustained, as they were legislative in character and not shown to be unreasonable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 17 Feb 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187598