( 1. ) BEING aggrieved by order dated 11-3-2002 passed by respondent No. 2 whereby the petitioner has been removed from the post of member of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Indore and the order dated 26-6-2002 passed by respondent No. 1 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed, the present petition has been filed.

( 2. ) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioner is an elected member of M. P. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Indore who is respondent No. 4 herein. On 1-3-2001, respondent No. 2 issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner wherein it was alleged that there were complaints of illegal recovery from the check-posts of Fruit and Vegetable Market against the petitioner. It was alleged that in the preliminary enquiry, complaints were found true and the petitioner is found guilty. It was further alleged that the act of the petitioner is amounting to encroachment upon the provisions of Section 27 of M. P. Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972. The petitioner was asked to submit his reply why action be not taken against the petitioner under Section 55 of the Act.

( 3. ) VIDE reply dated 20-3-2001, a detailed reply was given by the petitioner. In the said reply it was submitted that the petitioner has not encroached upon the provisions of Section 27 of the Act. It was submitted in the reply that under clause (xii) of sub-section (2) of Section 17 of the Act, it is the duty of the Market committee to levy and recover all moneys related to fees and other charges due, which the Market Committee is authorized to receive. It was alleged by the petitioner that an authentic complaint was given by the petitioner on 22-6-90 to the Secretary of respondent No. 4 wherein specific complaints were made regarding the loss which have been caused by the employees of respondent No. 4. It was further alleged that it goes to show that illegal recoveries which are being made by the employees of respondent No. 4, is in connivance with the Secretary of respondent No. 4. The petitioner also gave a detailed complaint about the losses which have been caused by the employees who are posted on check-posts, to Deputy Director Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Indore. It is also alleged that on 27-9-2000, in the presence of Vice President of respondent No. 4, the vehicle bearing No. MP 04-7316 and MP09-1673 was inspected and it was found that without payment of Mandi Fee, the goods are being carried out through the concerned vehicles. It was further alleged that on the check-posts, Shri Rajesh Shivcharan Yadav, Shri Mahendra Singh Bhadoria, Shri Kamlesh Sharma, Shri Sudhir Yadav, Shri Amarsingh Bout, Shri Mahesh Ranwe and Shri Ramesh Shukla etc. were on duty. In the reply, it was also alleged that the persons who were in those two vehicles informed that they were allowed to go by the employees of respondent No. 4 after taking the money. It was alleged that a fine of Rs. 580/- and Rs. 690/- was recovered from these two vehicles and the receipts were issued. It was prayed that notice issued against the petitioner be quashed.

( 4. ) VIDE order dated 11-3-2002, the respondent No. 2 passed an order whereby the petitioner was removed from the post of member of the Marketing Committee under Section 55 of the Act. This order was challenged by the petitioner by way of filing an appeal which was dismissed by respondent No. 1 vide order dated 26-6-2002.

( 5. ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submits that no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner. It is also submitted that the documents which were relied upon against the petitioner, copies whereof were not supplied to the petitioner in spite of demand. It is also submitted that the statement on which the reliance was placed were neither supplied to the petitioner nor they were examined in the presence of the petitioner. Apart from this, no opportunity of cross-examination was given to the petitioner. It is further submitted that preliminary enquiry report which was held prior to issuance of no