JOSHI HASHMUKHBHAI PARTSHOTTAMBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the oral order dated 20.03.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.3167 of 2018 by which the learned Single Judge has allowed the petition filed by the present respondent Nos. 6 and 7.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioners original respondent Nos. 6 and 7 that they are traders, operating in the market area of Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Sinor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APMC') and are regularly paying market cess to the said APMC. Election of the said APMC came to be declared by the original respondent No.2 Director of Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance on 03.01.2018. The elections are to be held on 05.03.2018. Election programme is annexed at Annexure-B with the petition. It is stated that preliminary voters' list was published on 17.01.2018 by the Authorized Officer in which the names of the petitioners have been included in the traders' constituency. However, the Authorized Officer also included the names of original respondent Nos. 6 to 363 including the present appellants in the traders' constituency though the licences were issued to such original respondents on 24.10.2017. The petitioners, therefore, submitted objections to the Authorized Officer on 31.01.2018 and pointed out their grievance. However, the Authorized Officer rejected the objections and passed the impugned order on 07.02018, by which, the names of original respondent Nos. 6 to 363 were continued in the provisional voters' list. Though the said order appears to have been posted to the petitioners by RPAD, the same was not served to the petitioners and when the petitioners came to know about the same, they inquired with the office of respondent No.4. It was informed by the Authorized officer that on the objections given by the petitioners, order is passed. However, when the petitioners did not receive the order, they further inquired and came to know that the Authorized Officer has already passed an order on 07.02018 and therefore the petitioners filed the captioned petition in which the petitioners prayed for the following main reliefs:

(3.) The learned Single Judge, by impugned oral order, allowed the said petition and thereby directed the Authorized Officer to decide the objections of the petitioners afresh in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible within stipulated time.