RABARI HIRA DEVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is placed before the Division Bench on account of the reference made by the learned single judge of this court (P.K.Sarkar,J) with the reasons recorded in the order, dated 18.10.2000. The question raised is as under:

(2.) Before we proceed to examine the reference which is referred to this Bench, it may be stated that Mr.K.S.Zaveri, Ld.counsel for the petitioner had submitted before this court that the extended term of the Market Committee is already over, and therefore, the Chairman and Vice Chairman who continued to hold the office have also now ceased to be the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Market Committee. Therefore, Mr.Zaveri submitted the present petition has become infructuous and it may not be required for the Division Bench of this court to examine the question. He also submitted that even if the Division Bench of this court wants to examine the question referred by the learned single judge, then, in his submission, the law laid down by the coordinate Bench in the matter of Kantilal Rajuram Thakkar vs Director, Agricultural Market Finance (Coram: R.C.Mankad,J) reported in 1988(1) GLR 376 had continued to hold the field for a period of about 12 years, and therefore, it is a precedent which should not be reversed by the Division Bench. Alternatively, Mr.Zaveri also submitted that even otherwise also, the principle laid down in the aforesaid case, i.e. Kantilal Thakkar (supra) by the learned single judge is a correct view and therefore the Division Bench may decide the matter accordingly.

(3.) However, on behalf of the State Government, the Ld.AGP submitted that since the question is of a very important nature so far as the State Government is concerned, the matter may not be disposed of by the Bench without deciding the question as if it has become infructuous on account of subsequent events, i.e. the term of Market Committee is over. The Ld.AGP has further submitted that in her view also the principle laid down in the case of Kantilal Thakkar (supra) is a correct view. She further drew our decision of the another Ld.single judge of this court (R.Balia,J) in the matter of Thakore Sitaji Mohanji vs The District Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Deputy Director, Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance, Mehsana reported in 1996(2) GLH 416 and submitted that the aforesaid decision had come up for consideration and the view expressed by another learned single judge (Coram: R.Balia,J) of this court is the same as per the view expressed in the matter of Kantilal Thakkar (Supra) by accepting the same.