Important Point-Purpose behind curtailment of term would not be of much relevance when authority under law had ceased of Government.

Jayant M. Patel, Actg. C.J.

1. Admit. Mr. Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents-original petitioners waive notice for admission. With consent of learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, appeal is finally heard. The present appeal is directed against order dated 31st August, 2015 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Special Civil Application No. 13290 of 2015 whereby learned Single Judge for the reasons recorded in the order, has granted interim relief in terms of Paragraph 36(B) until the final disposal of the petition.

2. We have heard Mr. Prakash Jani, learned Additional Advocate General for the appellant-State and its officers and Mr. B.T. Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. The contention raised on behalf of the appellants was that the term could not be extended by the Government exceeding one year in aggregate as per the provision of Sec. 11(4)(aa) of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that when the Government exercised power for extension of the term on 30th December, 2012, such term could not be extended in any case exceeding one year, but it was extended for a period of one year or until the election is held. Thereafter, by now more than two-and-half-years have passed and the mistake made by the Government is corrected. He submitted that as per the provisions of the statute there is no authority for extension of the term of any Market Committee exceeding one year from the date of expiry of the term of the Market Committee. He submitted that learned Single Judge passed mandatory order as the charge was already taken over by the District Registrar and such mandatory order ought not to have been passed since the petition is virtually allowed as per the learned Additional Advocate General. He submitted, that hence, the order be interfered with by this Court in the present appeal.

4. Whereas Mr. Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the original petitioners-respondents herein submitted that Government now cannot back out from its stand that it has no power to extend the term exceeding one year. In his submission, provision of Sec. 11(4)(aa) was already in existence at the time when term was extended. Thereafter, election is not held and election is delayed for one or the other reason. He submitted that for holding of election, Special Civil Application No. 14494 of 2015 has been preferred by the office-bearers of the Market Committee and Notice has been issued by this Court making it returnable on 29th September, 2015 before other Bench and direction may be given for holding election. He submitted that the Government has given same treatment to A.P.M.C, Gondal. There also the term has been extended for a period of one year or until the election is held and by taking ground of pendency of the matter before the Apex Court, election of A.P.M.C, Gondal is also not held and the State has taken stand in the present matter that on account of pendency of the matter before the Apex Court in case of A.P.M.C, Gondal, election is not being held of A.P.M.C, Rajkot which is in the present case. He submitted that since the Government wanted to back out and there are political mala fide for curtailing the term of Market Committee, learned Single Judge exercised power for grant of interim relief. He submitted that the interim relief of mandatory nature though is granted considering the facts and circumstances of the case. As per Mr. Rao, after the order passed by the learned Single Judge, charge has been handed over by the subordinate of the District Registrar to the office-bearers of the Market Committee. Of course, as per Mr. Jani, learned Additional Advocate General, the charge has not been handed over but ex parte charge has been taken over.

5. The principal aspect which may arise for consideration in the present matter is the scope and ambit of the provision of the statue under Secs