The Supreme Court, in this case, addressed whether "ghee" falls under the definition of "products of livestock" under The Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966, and the validity of a 1994 government notification that regulated its purchase and sale in notified market areas. The Court upheld the Andhra Pradesh High Court's majority decision, confirming that "ghee" is a product of livestock and can be regulated under the Act. It also confirmed the market committees' right to levy market fees on ghee producers, with provisions to pay the fees over time to alleviate hardship.

1. Introduction (Para 1-2):

• Two issues were raised in this appeal:
  • Whether "ghee" is a product of livestock under The Andhra Pradesh Markets Act, 1966.
  • Whether the government notification regulating ghee was valid.

2. Legal Background of the Act (Para 3-4):

• The Act regulates the sale of agricultural produce and livestock, aiming to protect farmers from exploitation.
• Sections 2(v) defines "livestock" and 2(xv) defines "products of livestock."
• The process of notification under Sections 3 and 4 is elaborated.

3. History of Notifications (Para 5-7):

• In 1968, Andhra Pradesh issued a notification declaring "ghee" as a livestock product.
• In 1972, "ghee" was removed from the respondent-committee's list, but in 1994, it was re-included.
• The 1994 notification was challenged in court, arguing that "ghee" was not a livestock product, and the procedure under Section 3 was not followed.

4. High Court Judgment (Para 8-10):

• The Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld the 1994 notification by a 2:1 majority, ruling that "ghee" is a product of livestock under the Act.
• Citing earlier judgments, the Court emphasized that animal husbandry products fall under the definition of livestock products.

5. Supreme Court's Agreement on Ghee (Para 10):

• The Supreme Court agreed with the High Court's reasoning, stating that "ghee" derived from milk is a "product of a product of livestock" and hence validly regulated under the Act.

6. Differentiation of Sections 3 and 4 (Para 11):

• The Court clarified the distinction between notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act.
  • Section 3 deals with a one-time notification to regulate areas.
  • Section 4 governs the notification of specific products within those areas, without the need for prior public objections.

7. Market Fee Issue (Para 12-14):

• Market fees on ghee were imposed after the 1994 notification.
• The appellants sought relief from paying fees during the interim protection granted by the High Court.
• The Supreme Court ruled that the fee must be paid, but allowed a two-year installment payment to alleviate hardship.

Key Acts and Sections Discussed:

• The Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966:
  • Section 2(v): Definition of "Livestock".
  • Section 2(xv): Definition of "Products of Livestock".
  • Section 3: Procedure for declaring notified areas.
  • Section 4: Constitution of market committees and declaration of notified market areas.
  • Section 12: Empowerment of Market Committees to levy market fees.

Ratio Decidendi:

• Ghee as a Product of Livestock: The Supreme Court affirmed that "ghee," being derived from milk, qualifies as a product of livestock under the Act, even though it is not directly obtained from livestock.
• Validity of Notification: The 1994 notification was upheld, as it was issued under Section 4, which does not require the procedural steps outlined in Section 3.
• Market Fees: The appellants must pay the fees retrospectively, but were granted leniency in payment through installments.

Subjects:

• Ghee, Livestock, Andhra Pradesh Markets Act, 1966, Government Notification, Market Fees

• #LivestockProducts #Ghee #AndhraPradesh #AgriculturalProduce #MarketRegulation #SupremeCourt #MarketFees #AnimalHusbandry