LAWS(BOM)-2013-4-118

VILAS RANGRAO MAHALLE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On April 09, 2013
Vilas Rangrao Mahalle Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, 15 Directors of Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Amravati (Respondent No. 4) question the order dated 27.12.2011 passed by Respondent No. 2 - District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, superseding it under Section 45 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963, (hereinafter referred to as 1963 Act) & appointing an Administrator on it. The Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation), Rules, 1967 framed under this Act are hereinafter referred to as 1967 Rules.

(2.) This Court has on 16.01.2012, restrained Administrator from taking charge of A.P.M.C. and thus elected body viz., petitioners still continue to function.

(3.) The Notice under Section 45 of 1963 Act for supersession is on various grounds which require scrutiny of material on record as the petitioners wish to contend that the Charges are not proved against them. But then during arguments, parties agreed to passing of an order on preliminary objections raised by the petitioners first and thereafter if necessary, to proceed with further hearing of the petition on merits of those charges ie alleged perversity. Accordingly, this judgment is being delivered only in the light of arguments advanced on the preliminary contentions about absence of effective previous consultation with State Agricultural Marketing Board ie Respondent 10 & correctness of procedure followed by Respondent No. 10 - Board therefor and need of an order under Rule 117 (4) of 1967 Rules on enquiry report under S. 40 of 1963 Act.