IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.J. DESAI, BIREN VAISHNAV, JJ.
Patel Kaushik Manharbhai – Appellant
Versus
Vallabh Industries – Respondent
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.435 of 2023 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4104 of 2023 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR INTERIM RELIEF) NO.1 of 2023
Decided on : 13-04-2023
Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Rules, 1965 - Rule 10, 7, (2), 8 (1), 28 - Gujarat Agricultural Produce and Marketing (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 1963 - Section 11, 27 or 27A - Election - Names were removed from voters' list - Letters Patent Appeal arises from an oral order passed by learned Single Judge accepting petition filed by private respondent and quashing and setting aside order by which names of petitioners as voters of Traders Constituency for elections were removed from voters' list – Held, In case of Kanubhai Manibhai Patel (Supra), Court has dealt with similar provisions of Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 and held that a challenge of a membership of a delegatee as a member of Society may be subject matter of other proceedings, but that issue cannot be decided by Election Officer at time of scrutiny of nomination under similar Rule – Court is in complete agreement with observations made by learned Single Judge in impugned order – Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
A.J. DESAI, J.
1. The present Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent arises from an oral order dated 14.3.2023 passed by learned Single Judge accepting the petition filed by the private respondent and quashing and setting aside the order dated 22.2.2023 passed by the Authorized Officer and Cooperation Officer (Markets), Chhotaudepur by which names of the original petitioners - (private respondents herein), as voters of Traders Constituency for the elections of Agriculture Produce Market Committee Bodeli, Tal. Sankheda, Dist. Chhotaudepur were removed from the voters' list accepting the objections raised by the present appellants treating that they have not paid the cess fees periodically but have paid in lump sum.
2. The appeal was listed on 28.3.2023 and considering the publication of election programme of the APMC, Bodeli, notice was made returnable on 3.4.2023. Learned advocates appearing for the respective respondents appeared and waived service. Accordingly, the appeal was heard on 3.4.2023.
3. The short facts arise from the record are as under :-
3.1 That Director of Agricultural Marketing & Rural Finance, Gujarat State published the election programme of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Bodeli on 18.1.2023. Part III of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'APMC Rules') provides the procedure for election of Market Committee. Under Rule 10 of the said APMC Rules, stages of election were declared in the said election programme issued by the Director of Agricultural Marketing & Rural Finance. Rule 7 of APMC Rules provides for supply of list of voters and for the present election in question, the list of voters for general election of APMC, Bodeli were to be supplied on 27.1.2023. As per Rule 7(2) of the APMC Rules, time to supply the preliminary voters' list was declared as 3.2.2023. As provided under Rule 8 (1) of APMC Rules, objectors may submit their reservations about inclusion and/or exclusion of the names in the preliminary voters' list.
3.2 The names of the original petitioners (private respondents herein) were included in the preliminary voters' list and, therefore, the present appellants raised objections against inclusion of their names before the Authorized Officer and Cooperation Officer (Markets) - respondent No.3 herein. The Authorized Officer and Co-operation Officer (Markets) by the order dated 22.2.2023 considered and accepted the objection by deleting the names of these persons which was subject matter of challenge before learned Single Judge.
3.3 Learned Single Judge after hearing the respective parties, accepted each petitions and quashed and set aside the order dated 22.2.2023 passed by Authorized Officer and Cooperation Officer (Markets) and directed to include the names of those members in the voters' list.
3.4 Hence this appeal.
4. Mr. Percy Kavina, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Dilip B. Rana, learned advocate appearing for the appellants has vehemently submitted that learned Single Judge has committed an error in quashing and setting aside the order dated 22.2.2023 passed by Authorized Officer and Co-operation Officer (Markets), who has after due consideration, found that those persons have not paid cess fees periodically but have paid in lump sum and, therefore, learned Single Judge ought not to have interfered with the said order at the stage when the election process was going on.
4.1 Mr. Kavina would further submit that Section 11 of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce and Marketing (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 1963 provides for (i) inclusion of those members in a Market Committee who are either agriculturists, whose names are enlisted in the voters' list published by the Election Commission of India for such market area who shall be elected by the members of managing committee of the Primary Agricultural Credit Cooperative Societies dispensing agricultural credit in the market area and (ii) four members to be elec
Mandropur (Fatehpur) Juth Seva Sahkari Mandali Limited v. State of Gujarat
Shri Pratagarh Seva Sahakari Mandali Limited v. Director, Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable if the order is ultra vires or nullity and/or ex-facie without ....
The court ruled that names cannot be included in the voters' list after the election declaration date, emphasizing the Authorized Officer's duty to act independently and in accordance with the law.
Eligibility for inclusion in the voters' list requires payment of market fees for the current year; failure to comply results in exclusion.
The court upheld the exclusion of petitioners from the voters list for failing to meet statutory eligibility requirements, emphasizing limited judicial intervention in ongoing election processes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appellants have an alternative remedy available under Rule 28 of the APMC Rules, and therefore, the petition under extraordinary jurisdict....
The court upheld the jurisdiction of the authorized officer to remove names from the voters' list if their election or nomination does not adhere to statutory guidelines.
As competent authority of respondent-Corporation after considering the findings of inquiry report has come to the conclusion to impose the punishment on petitioner of removal from service which does ....
The court emphasized that interference at an intermediate stage of the election process should be limited and that issues and controversies should be settled through a properly instituted election pe....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.