JUDGMENT

VENKATARAMIAH, J.:—This is a petition under Art. 136 of the Constitution of India praying for special leave to file an appeal against the judgment dated Jan. 2, 1986 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh (Gwalior Bench) in Miscellaneous Petition No. 889 of 1985 filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. Petitioner No. 1 is a commission agent (adhatia) carrying on business within the jurisdiction of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Bhind in the State of Madhya Pradesh and Petitioner No. 2 claims to be an agriculturist residing in village Lawan, District Bhind. The Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Bhind (hereinafter referred to as the Market Committee) constituted under the Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) passed a resolution on Feb. 25, 1981 resolving to abolish the Kuchhi Adhat System (which could not co-exist with a direction issued under S. 32(5) of the Act) in the market area at Bhind in exercise of its powers under sub-sec. (5) of S. 32 of the Act and submitted the resolution for the approval of the Director of Marketing. The Director accorded his approval to the resolution on Dec. 4, 1981. The said resolution was, however, kept in abeyance for some time but on Feb. 21, 1982 the Market Committee adopted a further resolution resolving to continue the Kachhi Adhat System till necessary alternative arrangements were made. On Aug. 29,1982 the Market Committee passed another resolution requesting the Collector to fix the wages of Hambals (Coolies). On Oct. 6,1982 the Market Committee decided to bring into force its decision to abolish the Kachhi Adhat System, But in the meanwhile one Ganga Ram had instituted a civil suit against the Market Committee for an injunction restraining the Market Committee from giving effect to its resolution and applied for the issue of a temporary injunction in the same terms during the pendency of the suit. The trial Court refused to pass the interim injunction. In the appeal filed against the order of the trial Court refusing to grant the interim injunction, a temporary injunction was issued as prayed for on Oct. 6, 1982. Against the order passed on appeal a civil revision petition was filed before the High Court in Civil Revision No. 25 of 1984. In that Civil Revision Petition by consent of parties, an order was passed directing that the order of temporary injunction should remain effective for a period of three weeks only and that in the meanwhile the trial Court was directed to try the issue relating to the maintainability of the suit as a preliminary issue and to record its finding thereon. The trial Court by its order dated Oct. 31. 1985 dismissed the suit holding that it was not maintainable. On the suit being dismissed, Kachhi Adhat System which had continued by virtue of the order of temporary injunction came to an end. Immediately after the dismissal of the suit the petitioners herein filed the writ petition out of which this special leave petition arises questioning the validity of the resolution passed by the Market Committee abolishing the Kachhi Adhat System. The High Court after hearing the parties dismissed the petition. This petition is filed under Art. 130 of the Constitution of India against the order of the High Court.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the abolition of the Kachhi Adhat System by issuance of the directive under S. 32(5) of the Act was violative of Art. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution since according to them it imposed an unreasonable restriction on the right of the traders operating within the market area of Bhind. Section 32(5) of the Act reads thus :

"32(5). The market committee may, by a resolution, passed in that behalf and with the prior approval of the Director, direct that no commission agent or a broker or both shall act in any transaction between the producer seller or trader purchaser on behalf of a producer seller nor shall he deduct any am