B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.

Considering the nature of controversy, by issuing rule and making it returnable forthwith, we have heard the matter finally with the consent of Shri Naik, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Tembhare, learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1, 3 & 4 and Shri Sambre, learned counsel for respondent No. 5.

2. The petitioners are agriculturists in the jurisdiction of Respondent No. 5 – Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC). Petitioner No. 1 is the Director of Vihirgaon Seva Sahakari Sanstha, Vihirgaon, Tahsil and District – Nagpur and Petitioner No. 2 is the President of Seva Sahakari Sanstha, Bahadura, Post – Vihirgaon, Tahsil and District – Nagpur. Their societies are members of Respondent No. 5 – Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Nagpur, and the petitioners claim that they are voters in the elections of APMC i.e. for electing its Directors. The order dated 10.01.2017 passed under Section 14(3) and (3A) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is questioned on the ground that without recording any opinion properly, as mandated by those provisions, mechanical