( 1 ) KARNATAKA Ordinance No. 3/1997 by which S. 11 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1996 stood amended (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') was challenged by the respondents in Writ Petition Nos. 15380 and 15982 of 1997. The Ordinance was alleged to be discriminatory and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India. It was contended that satisfaction as contemplated under Art. 213 of the Constitution of India was not indicated while issuing Ordinance. There did not exist any immediate necessity warranting issuance of Ordinance particularly after the election process of the Market Committees was over and the results had been declared. The proposed amendment was alleged to be conferring powers upon the executive which would give scope to exploitation of farmers and agriculturists. The action of the State Government was alleged to be mala fide intending to take over the control of the constitution of the Committees. The impugned Ordinance was alleged to have been promulgated with the object of upsetting the democratic verdict given by the agriculturists in the APMC elections. The impugned Ordinance was further alleged to be inte