SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Guj) 1657

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J.
Amrutlal Mulchandas Patel & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Gujarat & Ors. – Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 8831 of 2024 With R/Special Civil Application No. 8833 of 2024
Decided on : 03-07-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MR MIHIR JOSHI, SENIOR COUNSEL with MR DIPEN DESAI
For the Respondent:MS MANISHA L SHAH, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL with MR JAY TRIVEDI with MS NIDHI VYAS

The State has discretion under the Gujarat Act to either extend the term of market committee members or appoint an Administrator after the term expires, depending on the existence of valid reasons for non-extension.

Headnote:(A) Gujarat Agricultural Produce Marketing (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 1963 - Sections 11(4)(aa) and 11(5)(a) - Petitioners, the elected members of the APMC, sought to extend the term of their committee after its expiry, or to declare elections. The court emphasized that the State has the discretion to extend the term or appoint an Administrator, depending on circumstances, citing that the petitioners cannot compel extension without valid reasons for continuation and the appointment of an Administrator aligns with statutory obligations. (Paras 2, 12, 15, 16)

(B) Elected bodies’ tenure - The court held that once the term expires, without extension by the State, the members cease to hold office; thus, their claim for extension was rejected as the respondents had valid grounds for non-extension. (Paras 10, 17)

(C) Legal obligations of the State - The court asserted that while the State is empowered to extend the term under Section 11(4)(aa), it is not mandated unless valid circumstances necessitate such an extension. (Paras 14-15)

Facts of the case:
The committee’s term, initially set for five years from its first meeting on 20.06.2019, expired on 19.06.2024. The petitioners apprehended an 'election holiday' would be initiated by the State following their term expiration.

Findings of Court:
The State acted within its rights to appoint an Administrator due to complaints against the committee.

Issues: Whether the State could deny extension of term when conditions allowed for elections to proceed?

Ratio Decidendi: The court maintained the State’s discretion in appointing an Administrator or extending terms, emphasizing the lack of vested rights for committee members post-term without extension.

Result: Both petitions dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners' request for apmc elections. (Para 1 , 2)
2. legislative framework and elections timeline. (Para 3 , 4 , 10)
3. claim for extension of committee term. (Para 6)
4. arguments against appointment of administrator. (Para 7)
5. court's views on statutory obligations. (Para 12 , 14)
6. conclusion on legal obligations and decisions. (Para 15 , 16)

ORDER :

Draft amendment dated 02.07.2024 is taken on record and the same is allowed. To be carried out forthwith.

1. Heard Mr. Mihir Joshi, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mr. Dipen Desai, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Manisha L. Shah, learned Additional Advocate General appearing with Mr. Jay Trivedi and Ms. Nidhi Vyas, learned AGP appearing for the respondent – State.

2. The Special Civil Application No.8831 of 2024 is preferred by the members of the Agriculture Produce Market Committee (for short ‘APMC’), Unjha and the Special Civil Application No.8833 of 2024 is preferred through the Chairman of the APMC, Unjha. The dispute involved in both the petitions is analogous and identical and in view thereof, both the petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

2.1 The facts of both the petitioners are identical and in view thereof, Special Civil Application No.8831 of 2024 is treated as the lead matter and facts of the said petition are reproduced herein.

3. By way of captioned petitions, the petitioners herein have prayed for a direction qua the respondent authorities more particularly, the respondent No.2 herein to declare and hold elections of the respondent No. 4 – APMC, Unjha, as early as possible. It is also prayed that in the meantime, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 be directed to extend the term of the present elected body of APMC, Unjha till the fresh elections are held and till the newly elected body takes over the charge of the APMC, Unjha. It is further prayed that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 be restrained from appointing Administrator in the respondent No.4 – APMC.

4. The petitioners herein are the elected members of the APMC, Unjha. The last elections of the APMC, Unjha was declared on 07.01.2019 by the respondent No.2 – Director and the election was to be held on 08.04.2019. The Loksabha elections came to be declared on 16.03.2019 as also the by- election of Unjha and Talala Legislative Assembly seats were also declared and therefore, in view of Model Code of Conduct having come into operation, the elections of APMC, Unjha was postponed by the State Government vide Notification dated 16.03.2019 and consequential order of postponing the elections of the APMC, Unjha was passed by the District Registrar on 15.04.2019.

4.1 Upon completion of the Loksabha elections as also the by-elections, the election process of the APMC, Unjha came to be restarted and finally the same was held on 09.06.2019. The newly elected body took over the charge of the APMC, Unjha in its first meeting held on 20.06.2019. Section 11(4)(a) of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Marketing (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 1963 (for short ‘the Act’) provides that the term of the office of the Market Committee shall be 5 years from the date of the first general meeting. In view of the aforesaid, the term of the Market Committee has expired on 19.06.2024 on completion of 5 years. The petitioners herein have approached this Court by preferring the present petition on 11.06.2024 seeking the aforesaid directions.

5. Notice and Notice as to interim relief came to be issued by this Court on 14.06.2024. The matter came to be adjourned and was posted for further hearing on 19.06.2024.

6. Mr. Mihir Joshi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that Section 11(4)(aa) of the Act provides for extension of term of the Market Committee. In view thereof, the first endeavor should be to see that the term is extended and only in exceptional cases, the State Government can appoint Administrator in exercise of powers under Section 11(5)(

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top