M/S. Heinz India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs State Of U.P. & Ors

The Supreme Court upheld the order of the High Court dismissing the writ petitions challenging the Director's order under Section 32 of the Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964. The Court reiterated that the Mandi Samiti can demand Mandi Fee based on the presumption of sale within Mandi limits, as established in Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti & Ors. v. Shree Mahalaxmi Sugar Works & Ors. The Court clarified that if dealers can rebut this presumption by proving no sale occurred, they may be entitled to passes, but until then, the fee demands stand valid.