GOVINDA BHAT, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is a partnership firm carrying on business in agricultural produce in Pathapalya village of Bagepally Taluk, Kolar District. The respondent is the Administrator of the Agricultural Produce Market committee, Chickballapur constituted under the Mysore Agricultural produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966, hereinafter called the Act. The respondent issued a notice to the petitioner on 5-3-1970 informing that the whole of Bagcpally Taluk has been declared as 'market area' under notification No. DPC. 466 CMD 68 dt. 25-3-1969 and all purchases and transactions made in respect of notified commodities within the 'market area' are covered by the provisions of the Act, Rules and Bye-laws. The petitioner was further called upon to remit the market fee failing which legal action was threatened to be taken. The petitioner protested, contending that no market yard had been established within the market area and consequently the respondent is not entitled to demand payment of market fee. Finally, the respondent by his notice dt. 4-4-1970, called upon the petitioner to produce their account books for purpose of determination of the amount of market fee due from them under the Act. Thereupon the petitioner approached this Court for relief under Art. 226 of the Constitution wherein they have prayed for a writ or direction directing the respondent to forbear from demanding payment of market fee or insisting that the petitioner firm should comply with the provisions of the Act till the market yard is established. ( 2 ) THE contention of the petitioner was that there was originally a market area declared for Chikballapur, Taluk under S. 4 of the Act. By a subsequent notification dt. 25-3-1969, the Taluks of Bagepally and Siddlaghatta were included in the Chikballapur market area and that in respect of the new market area so declared, no market or market yard has been notified as required under S. 6 (2) of the Act. In the absence of the establishment of a market yard in respect of the market area as declared on 25-3-1969, it is urged that the respondent is not entitled to levy market fee under s. 65 of the Act as held by this Court in K. N. Marularadhyal v. Regulated market Committee, Shimoga, (1969) 1 Mys. L. J. 533, 546. In the absence of the establishment of a market yard in respect of the market area as declared on 25-3-1969, it is urged that the respondent is not entitled to levy market fee under s. 65 of the Act as held by this Court in K. N. Marularadhyal v. Regulated market Committee, Shimoga, (1969) 1 Mys. L. J. 533, 546. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Secretary of the Market Committee, while it is admitted that the market area includes the Taluks of Chikballapur, Bagepally and Siddlaghatta, it was contended that a market yard has been established under law. It is not stated as to when the market yard was established and whether it was established subsequent to the Notification dt. 25-3-1969. It was urged by sri A. B. Mariyappa, learned Counsel for the respondent that assuming without conceding, that no market yard was established subsequent to the Notfn. dt. 25-3-1869, the respondent is entitled to levy market fee in view of the fact that a market yard had been established in respect of the Chikballapur market area originally declared, since the market area comprising the three taluks is an alteration of a market area made under S 5 of the Act. The notification under which the three taluks have been declared as a market area has also not been produced before us. We assume for the purposes of this Order that the Notification dated 25-3-1969 was a Notification made under S. 5 of the Act. Under the provisions of S. 5, the State Government may, at any time by notification, exclude from any market area any area or include therein additional area, subject to the procedure specified in ss. 3 and 4 of the Act. The inclusion of an additional area to an existing market area has also to be made by a declaration under S. 4. The expression 'market area' has been defined in S. 2 (19) to mean 'any area declared to be a market area under S. 4. Therefore the market area as altered by virtue of the Notification under S. 3 read with Ss. 3 and 4 of the Act, is also a market area declared under S. 4. S. 6 of the Act provides that for every market area, there shall be a market, and that for every market, there shall be a market yard. Therefore the market area as altered by virtue of the Notification under S. 3 read with Ss. 3 and 4 of the Act, is also a market area declared under S. 4. S. 6 of the Act provides that for every market area, there shall be a market, and that for every market, there shall be a market yard. The procedure for establishing a market and market yard is provided by sub-sec. (2) of S. 6. Under the said sub-section, the Chief Marketing Officer shall, as soon as possible after the issue of a notification under S. 4, by a Notification, declare any specified area in the market area to be a market. Under clause (b) of sub-sec. (2) of S. 6, the chief Marketing Officer has to notify the market yard. It is clear from the language of sub-sec. (2) that it is obligatory on the Chief Marketing Officer to declare any specified area in the market area to be a market as soon as possible after the issue of a Notification under S. 4. So also it is obligatory on him to specify any place as a market yard after the market has been notified. When the alteration of a market area made under S. 5 is deemed to be a declaration made under S. 4 of the Act, it follows that it is obligatory on the Chief Marketing Officer to specify any area in the market area to be a market and further to specify any place in the market to be a market yard. The market and market yard notified for the original market area and before the alteration declared under S. 5, cannot be regarded as the market or the market yard for the new market area declared under S. 5. If subsequent to the declaration made by Notification dt. 25-3- 1969 no market and market yard have been notified in the manner provided under S. 6 (2) of the Act, the respondent is not entitled to demand market fee from the petitioner who is carrying on business in the new area added to the original market area But if such a market has been notified and a market yard has been established subsequent to 25-3-1969, the petitioner is liable to pay the market fee as demanded. In our view, this declaration of the law is sufficient for the purpose of disposal of this matter. In our view, this declaration of the law is sufficient for the purpose of disposal of this matter. It is ordered accordingly. No costs. --- *** --- .