RATHOD RANGITSINH BHARATBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr V.C. Vaghela, learned advocate for the petitioners submitted that Director, Agriculture Marketing & Rural Finance, Gandhinagar, has declared the date of election to be 3/3/2023 as per the provisions of sub-rule (2) of Rule 10 of the Gujarat Agriculture Produce Markets Rules, 1965. After the elections were declared, the preliminary voters' list, has been published, containing the names of the petitioners. The objections were invited; and it appears that some objections, were lodged to the names of the petitioners. The Authorised Officer, without offering opportunity of hearing to the petitioners; unilaterally and possibly accepting the objections of the objectors, deleted the names of the petitioners. It is therefore, urged that before deleting the names of the petitioners from the preliminary voters' list, opportunity, ought to have been given to the petitioners which, is not done in the present case.

(2.) It is submitted that one of the petitioners, raised an objection against the deletion of the name which, was responded to by the Authorised Officer that the names of those who have traded, inter alia, only their names, have been included. It is submitted that no such formal order appears to have been passed and could not have been passed because the petitioners, were not heard. Therefore, the action on the part of the Authorised Officer, deleting the names from the preliminary voters' list, would be illegal and bad.

(3.) Mr J.K. Shah, learned Assistant Government Pleader, wants to take instructions and upon instructions from the Authorised Officer, who is personally present in the Court, it is reported that hearing was not afforded to the petitioners.