( 1 ) THE short facts of the case are that the petitioners, who are claiming the status as vegetable merchant, have approached this Court for challenging the order passed by the Collector dated 28. 8. 2000, whereby various directions are given, inter alia, to collect difference of the market price as per the Rules in response to the shops which are allotted to Respondents No. 4 to 9. As per the case of the petitioners, Chora Building at which the shopping centre is constructed is required to be used for vegetable market and not for any other purpose. It appears that respondent No. 3 Municipality had passed the resolution for construction of Santrampur Urban Development Coop. Bank Limited Vegetable Market. Thereafter, the building was constructed and so far as Respondents No. 4 to 9 are concerned, the Municipality passed the resolution No. 149 dated 30. 7. 1998, whereby the Municipality resolved for accepting the development amount as Rs. 40,000/= for the persons who were having cabins numbered and for unnumbered cabins it was agreed to accept the amount of Rs. 55,000/= and it was also agreed to allot the shop on rental basis. It appears that the petitioners approached before the Collector under Section 258 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act (hereinafter referred to as the "act") and the District Collector ultimately examined the matter and passed the order on 28. 8. 2000, whereby he found that the resolution of the Municipality dated 30. 7. 1998 vide No. 149 could not have been passed by the Municipality before undertaking the process for disposal of the property in public interest. However, the Collector found that considering the financial position of the vegetable merchants, who are petitioners herein, it may not be possible for them to spend huge amount and he found that there is already a building of Dharmashala, where a separate vegetable market can be constructed and, therefore, ultimately so far respondents No. 4 to 9 are concerned, the Collector directed that the difference of the development charge already paid and the market value which may be fixed as per the Rules be recovered from them within a period of six months and on that condition only the possession of the cabins be handed over. The District Collector also issued the direction to the Municipality for holding of the public auction by fixing the upset price in respect to ten other shops and for allotment on monthly rent. It is further directed by the District Collector in the said impugned order that whatever the development fund which may be realised from the allotment of the shops be deposited in the separate bank account and the amount be utilised for the construction of vegetable market by using the building of Dharmashala and after planning of the same, the allotment will be required to be made as per the rules. It is under these circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court by preferring this petition.

( 2 ) BEFORE considering the rival submissions of the parties it deserves to be recorded that on 11. 9. 2000 this Court (Coram: P. K. Sarkar, J.) passed the following order:"1. HEARD learned counsel Mr. Ajay Mehta for the petitioners. Issue rule. Petitioners to take steps for service of rule on respondents within two days. Rule returnable on 3-10-2000. 2. I have also heard Mr. Mehta on interim prayer. It is submitted by Mr. Mehta that the Government has allotted certain land to the Santrampur Nagar Palika for construction of a vegetable marked. Accordingly a Resolution was passed as back in 1992 by the Nagar Palika for construction of vegetable market. Thereafter, during the progress of the construction, the Nagar Palika has taken another Resolution that instead of the vegetable market, the stalls will be allotted for the general market. It is submitted by learned counsel that the Nagar Palika has obtained donations for construction of vegetable market. Present petitioners are vegetable vendors and they have challenged the deci