( 1 ) ALL these cases have been placed for hearing and decision before this Full Bench of Three Judges, on the order of reference made by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application Nos. 7278 of 2001 and 5120 of 2001 on 27-09-2001.

( 2 ) THE Letters Patent Appeal No. 1177 of 2001 arises out of an order of status quo passed by the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 9842 of 2001. Special Civil Application No. 5120 of 2001 and letters Patent Appeal No. 1177 of 2001 are cognate matters concerning moving and passing of no confidence motion against the Chairman of Agricultural Produce market Committee, Valsad. Special Civil Application No. 7278 of 2001 is also concerning moving and passing of no confidence motion against the Chairman of Junagadh agricultural Produce Market Committee. Letters Patent appeal No. 1451 of 1997 is concerning moving and passing of no confidence motion against the Chairman of Social justice Committee under S. 123 of the Gujarat panchayats Act, 1993. It is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge passed in Special Civil application 3484 of 1997 in the case of Narmadaben V. Parmar v. Taluka Development Officer, Kheralu decided on 15-10-1997 and the judgment is reported in 1998 (1) GLR 225.

( 3 ) A common question of general importance arises in all these cognate matters. The question raised on behalf of the petitioners/appellants is, whether in the absence of express provisions, for moving and passing of a no confidence motion against the Chairman/vice Chairman of agricultural Produce Market Committee under the Gujarat agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1963 and the Rules framed thereunder and the Chairman of Social Justice committee under the Gujarat Panchayats Act and the Rules framed thereunder, such a motion can validly be passed.

( 4 ) THE learned Single Judge by separate orders passed in special Civil Application No. 5120 and 7278 of 2001 concerning Valsad and Junagadh Market Committees respectively found that the decision of the learned single Judge (M. S. Shah, J) in the case of Narmadaben V. Parmar (supra) in which reliance was placed on the division Bench decision of this Court in the case of chimanbhai R. Patel v. Anand Municipality and others reported in 1983 (1) GLR 67 is in conflict with the opinions expressed by other High Courts, i. e. Hindurao balwant Patil and another v. Krishnarao Parshuram Patil and others reported in AIR 1982 Bombay 216 and Full Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the matter of Jagdev singh v. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana and others reported in AIR 1991 Pandh 149.

( 5 ) AT the out set, we consider it appropriate to record that as on the question raised before the learned Single judge the earlier Single Bench decision of this Court in narmadaben V. Parmar (supra) was relied on, in which reliance was placed on Division Bench decision of this court in Chimanbhai R. Patel (supra) which was binding precedent on her, an order of reference to a Bench larger than of Two Judges was not required, unless the learned single Judge would have expressed a dissenting opinion on the question of law involved in the case. None the less, since both the Letters Patent Appeals and Special Civil applications raising a question of law of general importance have been placed before us, we proceed to decide the same on merits.

( 6 ) BEFORE dealing with the facts of each case in detail, we may take up first for decision the common question of law raised in this batch of Petitions and Appeals.

( 7 ) A brief survey of the relevant provisions of the gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1963 and the gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Rules, 1965 is necessary to consider the question raised on the subject of passing of no confidence motion against the holder of elective Office of Chairman and Vice Chairman of Market committees. As the Preamble shows, the Act proposes to consolidate and amend the law relating to