BABASAHEB APPARAO AKAT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In terms of order dated 28th January, 2010 matter has been notified for final disposal. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard Counsel for the parties including the Advocate for the intervenor. The intervenor claims to be an agriculturist residing in the jurisdiction of the respondent No. 7 Committee as well as voter of Grampanchayat Constituency of A.P.M.C. Partur. He claims that he is interested in contesting the proposed election of A.P.M.C. Partur.

(2.) By this petition, the petitioners have challenged the orders dated 14012010 and 20012010 passed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 4 respectively of appointment of Administrator on respondent No. 7 Committee. It is further prayed that respondent Nos.1 and 2 may be directed to decide the proposals of the petitioners dated 28072009 and 14122009 pending with the respondents for granting extension to the petitioners to act as the members of respondent No. 7 Market Committee till the conclusion of election and further to grant extension to the petitioners in that behalf. It is also prayed that respondent No.4 be directed to complete the election process of respondent No. 7 Committee within period of two months without disturbing the election process.

(3.) The petitioners are the elected members of respondent No. 7 Market Committee. The election was held on 15062004. Their term of office was to expire on completion of five years from the date of assuming office as elected members i.e. on 11072009. Much before the term was to expire, respondent No. 7 passed Resolution on 06012009 to hold the election to elect new members of the Managing Committee. On 28042009, respondent No. 4 called voters list in respect of various Constituencies by issuing letters to various authorities. Respondent No. 5 directed respondent No. 7 to submit voters list vide letter dated 04052009. Voters list was prepared on 02062009 as per the direction of respondent No. 4 and submitted within specified time. It is also noticed that respondent No. 7 deposited expenses of Rs.50,000/for election by way of advance on 10062009. In other words, respondent No. 7 took all necessary steps for holding election before the expiry of the term of the present Committee but for some fortuitous circumstances beyond their control, the election could not be taken to its logical end, due to intervening circumstances such as Parliamentary and Assembly Elections. It is the case of the petitioners that neither the petitioners nor the respondent No. 7 can be blamed for the situation which has arisen, as all efforts were taken in right earnest for conducting election before the expiry of term in July 2009.