{"id":200850,"date":"2004-07-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-07-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004"},"modified":"2015-09-26T20:41:21","modified_gmt":"2015-09-26T15:11:21","slug":"talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004","title":{"rendered":"Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee &#8230; on 28 July, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee &#8230; on 28 July, 2004<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S.B. Sinha, S.H. Kapadia<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  2150 of 1998\n\nPETITIONER:\nTALCHER MUNICIPALITY\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTALCHER REGULATED MKT. COMMITTEE AND ANR.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 28\/07\/2004\n\nBENCH:\nS.B. SINHA &amp; S.H. KAPADIA\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>2004 Supp(3) SCR 167<\/p>\n<p>The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<\/p>\n<p>S.B. SINHA, J. : The Appellant Talcher Municipality constructed a market<br \/>\npurported to be in exercise of its power conferred upon it under Section<br \/>\n295 of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950. The control of the said market is<br \/>\nvested in the Municipal Council in terms of Section 296 thereof.<br \/>\nAgricultural produces within the meaning of provisions of the Orissa<br \/>\nAgricultural Produce Markets Act, 1956 (for short &#8220;the Act&#8221;) are bought and<br \/>\nsold in the said market.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Respondent-Market Committee sent a requisition dated 13.2.1996 to the<br \/>\nExecutive Officer of the Appellant stating therein that as it was in<br \/>\npossession of the said market where agricultural produces were being bought<br \/>\nand sold it was liable to transfer the same in terms of Sub-section (4) of<br \/>\nSection 4 of the Act. A similar request was made to hand over the Hat and<br \/>\nthe land situated at Angarua in terms of a letter dated 19.7.1996.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Appellant having failing and\/or neglected to comply with the said<br \/>\nstatutory requisition, the respondent, herein filed a writ petition before<br \/>\nthe High Court of Orissa praying for a direction upon the appellant for<br \/>\ntransferring its weekly market popularly known as Jajangi Weekly Market By<br \/>\nreason of the impugned judgment, the said writ petition has been allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p>The core question which falls for consideration is as to whether the land<br \/>\nand building of a daily market owned by a Municipality or a Gram .Panchayat<br \/>\nwhere notified agricultural produces are bought and sold is liable to be<br \/>\ntransferred to the Market Committee, if requisition therefor is made.\n<\/p>\n<p>Submission of Mr. P.N. Misra, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of<br \/>\nthe Appellant is that the said Act which was enacted by the State of Orissa<br \/>\nin exercise of its legislative competence contained in Entries 26, 27 and<br \/>\n28 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India: the<br \/>\nobject whereof being to protect the producers of agricultural produce from<br \/>\nbeing exploited by the middlemen and profiteers and enable the<br \/>\nagriculturists to secure a fair return for their produce, the market where<br \/>\npre-dominantly non-agricultural produces are bought and sold. Sub-Section<br \/>\n(4) of Section 4 of the Act would not apply. Strong reliance in this behalf<br \/>\nhas been placed on <a href=\"\/doc\/20007\/\">M.C.V.S. Arunachala Nadar Etc. v. The State of Madras &amp;<br \/>\nOthers,<\/a> [1959] Supp. l SCR 92 and Belsund Sugar Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar<br \/>\nand Others, [1999] 9 SCC 620.\n<\/p>\n<p>Submission of Mr. Das. learned counsel appearing on behalf of the<br \/>\nrespondent, on the other hand, is that the language used in Section 4(4) of<br \/>\nthe Act being clear and explicit, the judgment of the High Court must be<br \/>\nheld to have correctly rendered. The learned counsel pointed out that the<br \/>\nvires of Section 4(4) of the Act has not been questioned.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Act has been enacted to provide for better regulation of buying and<br \/>\nselling of agricultural produce and the establishment of markets for<br \/>\nagricultural produce in the State.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Cooperation Department of the Government of Orissa issued notifications<br \/>\ndated 2.8.1993 and 19.11.1994 whereby and whereunder various cereals,<br \/>\noilseeds, gur and sugarcane, fruits, vegetable items and animal husbandry<br \/>\nproducts were notified as agricultural produces.\n<\/p>\n<p>By reason of the provisions of the Act not only wholesale but also retail<br \/>\nsale of the agricultural produces as also the market wherein the buying and<br \/>\nselling of the agricultural produces are carried on is sought to be<br \/>\nregulated and control led. A &#8220;market area&#8221; and the &#8220;market&#8221; as defined in<br \/>\nSections 2(vii) and 2(vi) respectively are required to be declared as such<br \/>\nin terms of sub-section (I) of Section 4 and sub-section (5) of section 4<br \/>\nrespectively.\n<\/p>\n<p>Once the market area is declared, the rights of those dealing in<br \/>\nagricultural produces would be governed by the provisions of the said Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>The legislative competence of the State to enact such enactment in exercise<br \/>\nof its power under Entries 26, 27 and 28 of List II of the Seventh Schedule<br \/>\nof the Constitution of India is not in dispute. The Act deals with the<br \/>\nsupply and distribution of goods as well as the trade and commerce therein<br \/>\nas it seeks to regulate the sale and purchase of goods carried on in the<br \/>\nspecified markets.\n<\/p>\n<p>Entry 5 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India<br \/>\nwhereunder the Orissa Municipal Act has been enacted would be subject to<br \/>\nthe provisions of Entry 28 as the power to establish a market is a separate<br \/>\nand distinct one. It is true that the primary object of the Act, as has<br \/>\nbeen held in M.C. Y.S. Arunachala Nadar (supra) and Belsund Sugar Co. Ltd.<br \/>\n(supra), is to protect the producers inter alia from being exploited from<br \/>\nthe middlemen but the State has the requisite legislative competence to<br \/>\nestablish a market and in that view of the matter the said Act falls within<br \/>\nthe ambit of markets and covered by Entry 28, (See ITC Ltd. v. Agricultural<br \/>\nProduce Market Committee and Others, [2002] 9 SCC 232). The said decision<br \/>\nhas recently been followed in <a href=\"\/doc\/853784\/\">Engineering Kamgar Union v. M\/s. Electro<br \/>\nSteels Castings Ltd. &amp; Anr., JT<\/a> (2004) Supl. l SC 78.\n<\/p>\n<p>The said Act, as noticed hereinbefore was enacted for better regulation of<br \/>\nbuying and selling of agricultural produce.\n<\/p>\n<p>The power to regulate buying and selling of agricultural produce must be<br \/>\ninterpreted in the context in which the same has been used. Each person<br \/>\nwhoever is engaged in buying and selling of the agricultural produce in the<br \/>\nmarket shall be subject to the regulation for which the same has been<br \/>\nenacted. The expression &#8220;regulation&#8221; is a term which is capable of<br \/>\ninterpreted broadly. It may in a given case amount to prohibition.\n<\/p>\n<p>Section 4(4) of the Act must be construed in that context. Section 4(4) of<br \/>\nthe act reads thus:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law for the time<br \/>\nbeing in force, the market committee may, after a notification issued under<br \/>\nsub-section (1), by requisition, require any Municipality or Grama<br \/>\nPanchayat to transfer to it any land or building in possession of such<br \/>\nMunicipality or Grama Panchayat wholly or partly situated within the<br \/>\nconcerned market area which immediately before the establishment of the<br \/>\nmarket was being used by such Municipality or Grama Panchayat for similar<br \/>\npurpose, and the Municipality or Grama Panchayat, as the case may be, shall<br \/>\nwithin one month from the date of receipt of the requisition, transfer the<br \/>\nland or building or both, as specified in the requisition to the market<br \/>\ncommittee and the net income derived therefrom by the market committee<br \/>\nunder Section 11 shall be shared equally by the market committee and the<br \/>\nconcerned Municipality or Grama Panchayat, every year:\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided that the share of the Municipality or Gram Panchayat in any one<br \/>\nyear shall not be less than eighty per cent of the average net income<br \/>\nderived by it from land or building or both so transferred during the three<br \/>\nyears immediately preceding the transfer.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>A market may be belonging to a Municipality of Gram Panchayat but once a<br \/>\nmarket area has been declared the provisions of the said Act will bring<br \/>\nwithin its sweep even such markets. Sub-section (4) of Section 4 clearly<br \/>\nmandates that even the market of a Municipality or a Gram Panchayat falling<br \/>\nwith the market area will have to be transferred it requisitioned therefor.<br \/>\nIn the event of such transfer, the net income derived therefrom by the<br \/>\nmarket committee under Section 11 shall be shared equally by the market<br \/>\ncommittee and the concerned Municipality or Gram Panchayat every year. The<br \/>\nproviso appended to Sub-section (4) of Section 4 furthermore stipulates<br \/>\nthat the share of the Municipality or Gram Panchayat in any one year shall<br \/>\nnot be less than eighty per cent of the average net income derived by it<br \/>\nfrom land or building or both so transferred during the three years<br \/>\nimmediately preceding the transfer.\n<\/p>\n<p>It is true that the appellant Municipality is a local authority. It is<br \/>\nfurthermore true that in terms of Section 295 of the Orissa Municipal Act<br \/>\nthe appellant was entitled to provide places for use as public markets, the<br \/>\ncontrol of which, as noticed hereinbefore is to be exercised by the<br \/>\nMunicipal Council.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Act, however, contains special provisions. The provision of Section<br \/>\n4(4) of the said Act operates norwithstanding anything to the contrary<br \/>\ncontained in any other law for the time being in force. The provisions of<br \/>\nthe said Act, therefore, would prevail over the provisions of the Orissa<br \/>\nMunicipality Act. The maxim &#8216;generalia specialibus non derogant&#8217; would,<br \/>\nthus, be applicable in this case. (See D.R. Yadav and Another v. R.K. Singh<br \/>\nand Another, [2003] 7 SCC 110; <a href=\"\/doc\/1231613\/\">Indian Handicrafts Emporium and Others v.<br \/>\nUnion of India and Others,<\/a> [2003] 7 SCC 589 and <a href=\"\/doc\/35120\/\">M.P. Vidyut Karamchari<br \/>\nSangh v. M.P. Electricity Board, JT<\/a> (2004) 3 SC 423).\n<\/p>\n<p>If in a market where together with agricultural produces some non-<br \/>\nagricultural produces are also sold, the same by itself would not<br \/>\ndisentitle the respondent to exercise its statutory power contained in<br \/>\nSection 4(4) of the Act. Once, the respondent has the requisite<br \/>\njurisdiction in terms of provisions of the said Act to notify the market<br \/>\narea within which there may exist market owned by and\/or belonging to a<br \/>\nMunicipality or a Gram Panchayat power under Sub-section (4) of Section 4<br \/>\ncan, in our opinion, be exercised by the respondent Committee.\n<\/p>\n<p>Contention of Mr. Misra to the effect that in the market in question apart<br \/>\nfrom agricultural produces, non-agricultural produces are also bought and<br \/>\nsold and thus, it was obligatory on the part of the authorities concerned<br \/>\nto find out the dominant object of the Municipality in establishing the<br \/>\nsaid market cannot be gone into by this Court for the first time as such a<br \/>\ncontention has not been raised before the High Court. The appellant<br \/>\nfurthermore did not raise any contention before the High Court as regard<br \/>\nthe effect of sale of non-agricultural produces in the said market. Such a<br \/>\ncontention which would involve investigation into questions of fact cannot<br \/>\nbe allowed to be raised for the first time before this Court; more so when<br \/>\nbefore us no factual foundation has been laid down in the Special Leave<br \/>\nPetition.\n<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the validity or legality of the said provision having not been<br \/>\nquestioned, the appellant at this stage cannot be permitted to urge that<br \/>\nthe same will have no application. in the case of this nature.\n<\/p>\n<p>For the reasons aforementioned, there is no merit in this appeal which is<br \/>\naccordingly dismissed. No costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee &#8230; on 28 July, 2004 Bench: S.B. Sinha, S.H. Kapadia CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 2150 of 1998 PETITIONER: TALCHER MUNICIPALITY RESPONDENT: TALCHER REGULATED MKT. COMMITTEE AND ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 28\/07\/2004 BENCH: S.B. SINHA &amp; S.H. KAPADIA JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT 2004 Supp(3) SCR 167 The [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-200850","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee ... on 28 July, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee ... on 28 July, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2004-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-26T15:11:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee &#8230; on 28 July, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-26T15:11:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004\"},\"wordCount\":1750,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004\",\"name\":\"Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee ... on 28 July, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-26T15:11:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee &#8230; on 28 July, 2004\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee ... on 28 July, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee ... on 28 July, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-26T15:11:21+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee &#8230; on 28 July, 2004","datePublished":"2004-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-26T15:11:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004"},"wordCount":1750,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004","name":"Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee ... on 28 July, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-26T15:11:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/talcher-municipality-vs-talcher-regulated-mkt-committee-on-28-july-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Talcher Municipality vs Talcher Regulated Mkt. Committee &#8230; on 28 July, 2004"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/200850","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=200850"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/200850\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=200850"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=200850"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=200850"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}