RAJESHBHAI VAGHJIBHAI CHAUDHARI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr.Dipen Desai for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader Ms.Manisha Lavkumar for respondent Nos.1 to 4, learned advocate Mr.B.T. Rao for respondent No.5 and learned advocate Mr.N.P. Chaudhary for respondent No.8. Respondent Nos.2 -4, 18, 40 -41, 59 -63, 65 and 68 are served. The rest of the respondents refused the notice.

(2.) By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed for a direction to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 03rd May, 2016 passed by the fourth respondent - Authorised Officer so far it does not allow the objections entirely and so far as it retains names of respondent Nos.06 to 101 in the voters list of traders constituency for the election to Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Kheralu. A further prayer is made for a direction against the fourth respondent to delete names of respondent Nos.06 to 1010 from the voters' list of traders constituency.

(3.) The election programme for the general elections to the Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Kheralu, District Mehsana, was published on 22nd March, 2016. As per the time -table of election announced thereunder under Section 10(2) of the Agriculture Produce Market Committee Act, the elections were announced on 29th March, 2016, list of voters was prepared as per the programme and the preliminary list of voters was published on 13th April, 2016, objections to the preliminary list of voters were invited on 27th April, 2016 to be submitted within 14 days, revised list of voters after consideration of objections was published on 03rd May, 2016, further objections to the revised list could be submitted upto 10th May, 2016. Filing of nominations started from 13th June, 2016 and scrutiny is to take place on 14th June, 2016. The final list of voters is fixed to be published on 17th June, 2016 and the date of voting would be 28th June, 2016. 3.1 It is the case of the petitioners that preliminary list of voters were published on 13th April, 2016 wherein names were included of the persons who were not, according to the petitioners, eligible since they were granted licences only in the year 2015 -16. It is the case of the petitioners that those persons to whom licences were granted at the fag end and immediately before the election, could not have been included in the list of voters for the traders constituency as they cannot be said to be qualified traders to become the voters. The petitioners have therefore raised objection against the claimed wrongful inclusion of respondent Nos.06 to 101.