The court emphasized that the requirement to give reasons in the notifications was not mandatory, and even if it was, the impugned notifications were unsustainable in law.

( 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( 4 ) IT is not in dispute that these four market Committees, which have been replaced by the Administrators were market committees constituted after elections as provided in the Act.

( 5 ) UNDER S. 38 (1) of the Act the term of office of the members of the market committee is four years. The term of four years of the APMC Hagaribommanahalli expired on 3. 1. 1983 and that of Kottur, Siruguppa and kumta respectively on 21. 4. 83 10. 1. 83 and 4. 7. 82. The proviso to S. 38 (1) confers power on the State Government to extend the term of office of the members of the Market Committee from time to time for a period not exceeding one year. Exercising its powers under the proviso the State government extended the term of office of the APMC of Hagaribommahalli by its Notification 1. 1. 83 (No. RDC-1 MMD 83) for a period of six months from 4. 1. 83 to 3. 7. 1983 or till the elections to the said committee is held whichever is earlier (Annexure-A in w. P. NO. 4813/83 ). By similar notifications issued it extended the term of office of APMC, Kottur, upto 24. 7. 1983, and that of Siruguppa till 10. 7. 1983 and that of Kumta, till 4. 7. 1983. It may be noted that kumta Committee's term has been extended twice by two such notifications. In the case of these three market committees of Kottur, siruguppa and Kumta notifications extending the term of office were issued respectively on 6. 1. 1983, and 5. 7. 1982 and 3. 1. 1983. While these market committees were thus functioning, the State Government on the same day 5th March, 1983 have issued the impugned notifications replacing the said committees by Tahsildars. The Notifications are also worded similarly.

( 6 ) IT is stated above that the impugned notifications dt. 5. 3. 1983 have been issued by the State Government treating the earlier notifications issued by it extending the term of office of the market committees as void. The Government have given some reasons in the impugned notifications for treating the earlier notifications as void. What they say is that they had issued earlier notifications extending the term without giving any reasons therefor, though it was obligatory for them to have given such reasons and that non-furnishing of reasons had made these earlier notifications, as observed by the Supreme court in several of its decisions as non-est, invalid,and in-operative in law, and also that in this connection they had received several representations from others questioning the validity of the said notifications the appointment of administrators in the impugned notifications have been made by the State Government exercising their powers under S. 130 of the Act.

( 7 ) THE petitioners contention in all these cases is that, in issuing these impugned notifications, the State government had exceeded its powers. The learned counsel for the petitioners argue that the State Government having once extended the term of office of these m