SHARAD JOSHI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is an agriculturist and who states that he is the founder and activist of Shetkari Sanghatana, an organisation of farmers working for the betterment of the farmer community in general, has preferred this petition as pro bono publico representative in the nature of public interest litigation. Amongst other reliefs, he prays for a writ directing the State of Maharashtra to supersede the present Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Pune, and to appoint an Administrator to take charge and control of the said Market Committee. He also seeks an order restraining respondents Nos. 1 and 2 from allotting lands and from taking possession of any piece of land either acquired or under acquisition for expansion of the Market Yard and other reliefs.

(2.) IT must be stated that this writ petitioner had preferred an identical petition before this Court which was Writ Petition No. 349 of 1991. The petitioner therein had wanted to expose the abuse of powers committed by the Market Committee in the matter of allotment of lands to various individuals and bring out several irregularities and illegalities committed by the said Market Committee. However, at the stage of admission, this Court, looking to the scope of reliefs prayed for, expressed the view that the prayers had a very wide scope and it was advisable for the petitioner to join the parties affected thereby, so that they could be heard before any relief could be granted. The petitioner was, therefore, allowed to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh petition or petitions on the above lines.

(3.) ON the basis of the said liberty, the petitioner has tendered this petition and three connected writ petitions. Writ Petition No. 2500 of 1991 relates to the general reliefs against the State of Maharashtra, the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, the Director of Marketing, etc. , while the three connected petitions bearing Writ Petitions Nos. 2497 of 1991, 2498 of 1991 and 2499 of 1991 are directed against individual who has secured advantage by doubtful means in the matter of allotment and transfer of lands.