JUDGMENT A.N. Varma, J. - The petitioners who are wholesale dealers in Kirana goods. have assailed, by means of this petition, the levy and collection of market fee by the respondent Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Sadabad (hereinafter referred to as the respondent Mandi Samiti) on the Kirana goods sold by the petitioners to various retailers. They have prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Mandi Samiti not to levy and collect market fee from the petitioners on the Kirana goods purchased from them in the market area of Mandi Samiti, Agra and which are being carried by traders to various destinations outside the market area of Sadabad. 2. Shortly stated, the petitioners' case is that as wholesale dealers they purchased Kirana goods from various States like Gujarat, Rajasthan, Bihar, Punjab and Andhra Pradesh, etc. under bills, Hundis and invoices establishing the fact that the purchases made by them were from traders of places outside the market area of Agra. They do not make purchases from any agricultural producer in the market area of Agra. In the usual course of business after having imported the Kirana goods within Agra, they sold it to retail traders from outside the city of Agra. The petitioners contend that such sales to retail dealers within the market area of Agra are not leviable to market fees and a dispute has already been pending in that behalf between the petitioners and the Agra Mandi Samiti. They further assert that these traders who purchase Kirana goods from the petitioners for being carried to various destinations like Sambhal in the district of Moradabad, etc. all falling outside the local limits of the 'market area Sadabad by trucks which, in the course of their journey, pass through the market area Sadabad. The truck drivers carry bills, Biltis and invoices establishing beyond doubt that the purchases have been made within the market area of Agra Mandi Samiti and are booked for places outside Mandi Samiti, Sadabad and that the goods are merely in transit through the said Mandi Samiti. The truck drivers carry bills, Biltis and invoices establishing beyond doubt that the purchases have been made within the market area of Agra Mandi Samiti and are booked for places outside Mandi Samiti, Sadabad and that the goods are merely in transit through the said Mandi Samiti. The official of the Sadabad Mandi Samiti, however, have been stopping these trucks at the Mandi Samiti barrier and levying and collecting market fee as well as compounding fee on an assumed basis, i.e. treating these goods as having been purchased from the market area of Sadabad itself, ignoring the protests of the truck drivers that the goods are merely in transit, having been purchased within the market area of Agra for being transported to places outside the Mandi Samiti, Sadabad. The Officials also refused to take into account the bills, Biltis or invoices produced by these truck drivers in support of their protests and are insisting on the production of gate pass of Agra Mandi Samiti despite the information supplied to them by the truck drivers that no market fee was leviable by the Agra Mandi Samiti in respect of the goods in question and that, therefore, none has been paid. 3. On the assertions set out above the contention of the petitioners is that the levy and collection by the respondent Mandi Samiti on the Kirana goods purchased from the petitioners which are merely in transit through the market area of the respondent Mandi Samiti are wholly incompetent and without any authority of law. 4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent Mandi Samiti from which it is apparent beyond doubt that the levy of market fee on the petitioners is entirely on an assumed basis. The burden of the respondent's counter affidavit is that since the transporters do not produce any gate pass of the Mandi Samiti, Agra, it is entitled to presume that the sale transactions have not taken place within the market area of Agra Mandi Samiti but they must have taken place within its own market area and hence exigible to market fee by it. In the counter-affidavit it is further asserted that, in the first place, the truck drivers did not produce any bills or Biltis, etc. In the counter-affidavit it is further asserted that, in the first place, the truck drivers did not produce any bills or Biltis, etc. at the respondent Mandi Samiti barrier in support of their claim that the goods are in transit from Agra to other places outside Mandi Samiti Sadabad and secondly, these bills, Biltis and invoices are entirely irrelevant and immaterial as proof of the fact that the goods were purchased within the market area of Agra or that they are in transit to places outside the market area of the respondent Samiti. According to the respondent, the only acceptable proof of the assertion that the goods have been purchased within market area of Agra Mandi Samiti would be the gate pass issued by it and in its absence the respondent is entitled to demand and collect market fee from the petitioners. 5. For the petitioners it was contended that the demand for the production of the gate pass of Agra Mandi Samiti by the respondent and, on the failure of the transporters to produce the same, the levy and collection of the market fee on the goods sold by the petitioners are wholly unsupported by any statutory provisions. It was urged that the gate passes issued by the Agra Mandi Samiti under the provisions of the U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Adhiniyam and the Rules framed thereunder as well as the bye- laws framed by the Mandi Samiti, Agra are relevant only for showing that market fee has been paid on the goods purchased within market area of that Mandi Samiti and since the petitioners are not paying any market fee to the Agra Mandi Samiti because of the pendency of a dispute between them and the Agra Mandi Samiti in this Court in the shape of certain writ petitions, it is impossible for them to produce the gate passes of Agra Mandi Samiti. That being so, it was argued, the action of the respondent Samiti in insisting on the gate passes of the Agra Mandi Samiti as the sole and only proof of their claim that the goods have been sold within the market area of Agra is clearly arbitrary and wholly without any authority of law. That being so, it was argued, the action of the respondent Samiti in insisting on the gate passes of the Agra Mandi Samiti as the sole and only proof of their claim that the goods have been sold within the market area of Agra is clearly arbitrary and wholly without any authority of law. It was further submitted that the bills, Biltis and invoices which are produced by the petitioners establish beyond doubt that the goods have been purchased within the market area of Agra and pass through the market area of respondent Mandi Samiti merely in transit to places outside the respondent's market area. Consequently the levy and collection of market fee on the petitioners by the respondent Mandi Samiti are clearly unjustified. 6. On behalf of the respondent Mandi Samiti learned counsel reiterated the stand taken in the counter-affidavit set out hereinabove. The respondent's counsel submitted that the Mandi Samiti, Sadabad is perfectly within its right to levy market fee on the petitioners on an assumed basis as the petitioners had not furnished the only reliable evidence in support of their claim, namely, the gate passes of Agra Mandi Samiti. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and having given the matter a careful consideration, we are clearly of the opinion that the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners are well founded and must be accepted. As mentioned above, the respondent Mandi Samiti is levying and collecting market fee from the petitioners on an assumed basis and not on any direct evidence of purchases or sales having taken place within the market area of respondent Mandi Samiti and this presumption is founded exclusively on the inability of the petitioners and their transporters to produce the gate passes of Agra Mandi Samiti. 8. Thus, in paragraph 4 of the counter-affidavit as well as in other paragraphs thereof the clear stand taken by the respondent Samiti is that it would not accept any other evidence in support of the petitioner's claim than the gate passes issued by the latter. 8. Thus, in paragraph 4 of the counter-affidavit as well as in other paragraphs thereof the clear stand taken by the respondent Samiti is that it would not accept any other evidence in support of the petitioner's claim than the gate passes issued by the latter. In paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit the respondent asserts : "it is immaterial that they were having bills, Hundis and invoices." Now the clear case of the petitioners is that they are not liable to pay any market fee to the Agra Mandi Samiti on kind of transactions being entered into within the market area of that Samiti. They also assert that no gate passes are being issued to them because of that fact. It is said that a dispute is pending between the petitioners and the Agra Mandi Samiti in that connection. Under the circumstances, the petitioners cannot obviously produce gate passes of Agra Mandi Samiti which is being insisted on by the respondent Mandi Samiti. 9. The question which falls for consideration, therefore, is whether if the petitioners cannot produce the gate passes of Agra Mandi Samiti for the reasons asserted by them, are they precluded altogether from establishing that no transaction has taken place within the market area of Sadabad and that, in fact, the goods were booked from Agra to places outside the Sadabad Mandi Samiti? In our considered view, the question must be answered in the negative. Learned counsel for the respondent Mandi Samiti took us through the bye-laws framed by the Sadabad Mandi Samiti and he was entirely unable to point out any single provision therein which might indicate that in the absence of gate passes issued by the Mandi Samiti within which the goods may have been purchased, the same must be subjected to the levy of market fee by the respondent Samiti on an assumed basis, even if there is other evidence available which might affirmatively prove that the goods are purchased within the market area of another Mandi Samiti and are booked to destinations outside the respondent Mandi Samiti. Learned counsel for the respondent invited our attention to bye-law No. 68 of the Bye-laws framed by the Sadabad Mandi Samiti but we find the same does not support the contention of the respondent. Learned counsel for the respondent invited our attention to bye-law No. 68 of the Bye-laws framed by the Sadabad Mandi Samiti but we find the same does not support the contention of the respondent. It merely provides that every transporter or trader entering the market area of the Mandi Samiti shall be issued entry slip in Form No. 53 and a gate pass in Form No. 54 on leaving the same. This, however, has no bearing on the question at hand. Forms Nos. 53 and 54 do not require any particulars to be disclosed which might be relevant for deciding the question whether the goods are merely in transit. There are no columns therein for indicating the place of origin from where the goods are purchased and the place of destination. 10. In the absence of any specific statutory provision, therefore, we see no valid ground why the respondent Mandi Samiti should not accept all such documents as are commercially in vogue establishing the fact that the goods have been purchased within the local limits of a market area A for being carried to those of market area B and are merely in transit through the respondent Mandi Samiti for being carried to their place of destination. We are clearly of the opinion that the respondent's stand that they would not accept bills, Biltis or invoices in support of the traders claim that the goods have not been purchased within the market area of Sadabad is unjust, unreasonable and arbitrary. There does not seem to be any valid justification for the respondent's insisting on gate passes of Agra Mandi Samiti as the sole and exclusive proof of the petitioners' assertion that the goods were merely in transit through Sadabad. The respondent Samiti cannot, therefore, in our opinion, levy and collect market fee from the petitioners just because they are unable to produce gate passes of Agra Mandi Samiti. 11. The respondent may, however, evolve a procedure for their own facility by issuing transit passes or any other like documents, such as are in vogue in municipalities and other local authorities at octroi barriers in respect of transport of goods which are merely in transit. It already has a procedure for issue of entry slips and gate passes. 11. The respondent may, however, evolve a procedure for their own facility by issuing transit passes or any other like documents, such as are in vogue in municipalities and other local authorities at octroi barriers in respect of transport of goods which are merely in transit. It already has a procedure for issue of entry slips and gate passes. It can supplement the same by issue of appropriate additional documents at the entry and exit barriers of the market area to facilitate the traders which merely pass through the market area without intending to transact any sales within that market area. 12. In regard to the amounts which the respondent Samiti have already realised from the petitioners however we are not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioners inasmuch as there is a serious dispute between the petitioners and the respondent as regard whether or nor the transporters produced any bills or Biltis at the barriers. In the counter- affidavit the respondent Samiti has asserted that no documents were produced by the truck drivers. In future, however, the respondent shall accept from the petitioners bills, Hundis or Biltis and invoices and such other commercially prevalent documents which may be relevant for determining whether the goods are merely in transit through Sadabad market area, and shall not insist on the gate passes issued by other Mandi Samitis as the sole evidence of the fact that the goods are merely in transit. 13. In the premise, the petition succeeds and is allowed. The respondent is directed not to levy and collect market fee on Kirana goods sold by the petitioners in the market area of Mandi Samiti, Agra to places outside the jurisdiction of the Mandi Samiti, Sadabad merely on the failure of the transporters to produce gate passes issued by the Agra Mandi Samiti. The petitioners shall be entitled to their costs from the respondent.