RENUKA AGENCIES Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the petitioners in W. P. No. 13588/2007 being aggrieved by the order dated 25-9-2008, wherein the learned single Judge has declined to interfere with the resolution passed by the third respondent - Agricultural Produce market Committee (for short, 'apmc'), davanagere dated 2-8-2007 and the consequential notices dated 27-8-2007.

(2.) THE essential facts of the case leading up to this appeal with reference to the rank of the parties in the writ petition are as fol-lows :-W. P. No. 13588/2007 was filed by the petitioners seeking for quashing of the resolution dated 2-8-2007 and the consequential notices dated 27-8-2007, wherein the petitioners have been asked to vacate the premises in their occupation and shift to the main market yard for conducting their business in Areca nuts. It is the case of the petitioners that Areca nut was declared as a notified commodity and respondent No. 3 - APMC, by virtue of power vested under Section 6 of the Karnataka agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation)Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the "act"), has set aside the area measuring 260 acres situate at Davanagere as the market yard. The petitioners are traders and commission agents in Areca. They made an application for allotment of shops in the APMC, yard and they were allotted shops in "a" block and leave and licence agreement was executed. However, the resolution was passed on 2-8-2007 resolving to shift the petitioners from the shops in question to some other shops. Though the majority of the members opposed the shifting on the ground that it will not be convenient to the traders as well as growers, the said resolution has been passed and, therefore, it is illegal and the consequential notices issued to the petitioners are also liable to be set aside.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 3-APMC, filed the statement of objections denying the averments made in the petition that the resolution is contrary to law and is liable to be set aside and that the consequential notices are also liable to be set aside and it is averred that the petitioners were temporarily accommodated in the shops that were meant for banana merchants in "a" block and the Market Committee in its meeting on 31-5-2007, after considering the representation of the commission agents dealing with Areca nut to conduct the Areca nut auctions either in the premises of Rytha bhavan or market yard i. e. in one place instead of both the places, it was agreed that the entire Areca nut business should be shifted to market yard at the request made by the commission agents association and accordingly, the petitioners were requested to shift the trade to the main market yard and, wherefore, the resolution and the consequential notices are justified and does not call for interference in this writ petition.