JUDGMENT : L. Rath, J. - The Attabira Regulated Market Committee (opp. party No. 1 ) having levied and collected market fees from the petitioners in respect of the paddy purchased by them from villages Sahara Tikra and Bheden the petitioners have approached this Court with the case of such fee not being either leviable or collectible 2. The opp. party No. 1 has not appeared in spite of notice on it being sufficient. It is the petitioners' case that the villages Sahara Tikra and Bheden are not within the market area of the opp. party No. 1 and that merely because the petitioners are obliged to carry the paddy on the National Highway which passes through the market area of the opp. party No. 1, the market fee has been levied and collected though the petitioners were transporting the paddy to Bargarh Rice Mill for the purpose of milling. It is the submission of Mr. Padhi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, that on the one hand there is no authority to levy such market fee and on the other, though the 1984 amendment to the Orissa Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1956 substitued collection of market fee from the sellers to that of the purchasers, yet no corresponding bye-law has been framed by the opp. party No. 1 for collection of the market fee from the purchasers and in effect the very same old bye-law Clause 13(1), which provided for collection of market fee from the sellers, is being resorted to for the purpose of collection of market fee from the purchasers. 3. The authority to levy market fee is as provided in Section 11 of the Act which says that it is competent for the Market Committee to levy and collect such fee, referred to as the market fee, on the agricultural produces marketed in the area. Admittedly the purchase of paddy has taken place outside the market area, the villages of purchase being not included in it. The marketing thus having taken place outside the market area, the Market Committee of the opp. party No. 1 would not have the authority to collect any market fee in respect of the transactions. Merely because a portion of the National Highway falls within the market area of the opp. The marketing thus having taken place outside the market area, the Market Committee of the opp. party No. 1 would not have the authority to collect any market fee in respect of the transactions. Merely because a portion of the National Highway falls within the market area of the opp. pirty No. 1, it would have no authority to restrict movement of the agricultural produces on the National Highway and collect merket fee on purchases that had been effected outside the market area. In that view of the matter, it is not necessary for us to go into the second question urged by Mr. Padhi, as to whether the market fee will be collectible in spite of any bye-law having not been framed for the purpose. 4. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. A writ be issued to the opp. party No. 1 directing it not to collect any market fee from the petitioners for their purchases effected outside the market area. The petitioners are also entitled to refund of all the market fees collected from them in respect of the transactions which were effected outside the market are. Such amounts be refunded to the petitioners on claim being lodged by them before the opp. party No. 1 within three months from the date of receipt of the writ from this Court. No costs. K.C. Jagadeb Roy, J. 5. I agree. Final Result : Allowed