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

1983 Supreme(Kar) 82

N.D.VENKATESH
KOTRAPPA HALDAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


Advocates:
B.G.SRIDHARAN, B.V.Krishnaswamy Rao, D.L.N.RAO, M.R.ACHARYA, SRIYUTHS M.SUBBARAO

N. D. VENKATESH, J.

( 1 ) SINCE common questions of law and facts arise in these cases they were clubbed and heard together.

( 2 ) THE petitioner in W. P. No. 4813/1983 is the Chairman of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC), Hagaribommanahalli Be,llary district. The petitioners 1 and 2 in w. P. No. 5038/83 are respectively the chairman and Director of the APMC kottur, Bellary Dt. The petitioner in W. P. No. 5367/83 is the Chairman of the A. P. M. C. Siruguppa and the petitioner in W. P. No. 5754/83 is the chairman of the APMC Kumta Bellary Dist.

( 3 ) BY the notifications impugned in these proceedings the 1st respondent, state of Karnataka treating the earlier notifications issued by it extending the term of office of the members of the respective Market committees as void, appointed the 2nd respondent, the tahsildar in each case as the Administrator to exercisethe power and duties of the A. P. M. C. , concerned and this order is made under S. 130 of the karnataka Agricultural Marketing (Regulation) Act 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).

( 4 ) IT is not in dispute that these four market Committees, which have been replaced by the Administrators were market comm




















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top