Bela M. Trivedi, J.

The questions of facts and law involved in all the seven petitions being similar, they were heard together with the consent of learned advocates for the parties and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. In all these seven petitions, the respective petitioners have challenged the impugned orders dated 15.02.2019 passed by the respondent - Authorized Officer deleting the names of the members of the managing committee of the petitioner - societies from the voters' list prepared for the Agriculturalists' Constituency for election of APMC, Unjha.

3. For the sake of convenience, the facts of Special Civil Application No. 3801 of 2019 are taken into consideration. As per the case of the petitioner of the said petition, the petitioner society was incorporated in the year 1979 under the provisions contained in the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, and was dispensing agricultural credit in the market area. The petitioner was treated as eligible voter for the agriculturalists' constituency as per Section 11(1)(i) of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the APMC Act'), since last 4 - 5 elections of APMC, Unjha. It is further case of the petitioner that now the programme for election of the APMC, Unjha has been declared vide notification dated 07.01.2019, and the provisional list of voters was published on 29.01.2019, in which the names of the members of the managing committee of the petitioner society were included. However, the respondent No. 2 having objected against such inclusion, the petitioner was called upon to submits its reply to the said objections, which reply was submitted before the respondent - Authorized Officer. The Authorized Officer after considering the objections and the reply, vide the impugned order dated 15.02.2019, allowed the said objections and deleted the names of the members of the petitioner's managing committee from the voters' list of the agricultural constituency of the APMC, Unjha. Similar objections were filed against Amudh Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Umiya Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Bhavanipura Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Visol Para Vistar Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Unjha Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Sunak Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd. The respondent - Authorized Officer passed similar orders against the said societies also. Being aggrieved by the same, the present petitions have been filed.

4. The learned advocate Mr. Chirag B. Patel for the petitioners vehemently submitted that though the petitioner societies were included in the voters' lists of agriculturalists' constituency in the earlier elections held for the APMC, Unjha, this time their names have been deleted by the Authorized Officer, holding that the petitioners were not dispensing agricultural credit as per three tier structure, and were not the primary agricultural societies. Relying upon the unreported decision of the Division Bench in the case of Vibhapar Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd. versus State of Gujarat and others decided on 15.07.2010 in Special Civil Application No. 6587 of 2010 and others, and in the case of Shrutbandhu Himatlal Popat versus State of Gujarat through Secretary reported in, 2011 0 GLHEL(HC) 226207, he submitted that the respondent - Authorized Officer had no jurisdiction to make roving inquiry into the genuineness of the transactions of the agricultural credit dispensed by the petitioner societies.

5. However, the learned Advocate General Mr. K.B. Trivedi appearing for the respondent authorities submitted that the issues raised by the petitioners in the petitions are no more res integra in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Bhesavahi Group Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Mandali Limited versus State of Gujarat and others decided on 28.06.2016 in Special Civil Application No. 2128 of 2016 and others, which has been confirmed by the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 569 of 2016 and also by the Supr