JALANDAR JAYARAM PATIL Vs. COLLECTOR THANE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the present petition, the petitioner challenges the judgment and order passed by Additional Commissioner, Konkan Division, by which his appeal under Rule 88 (3) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Rules, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") has been dismissed. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Commissioner has not gone into the merits of the appeal but has dismissed the same on technical grounds namely non-joinder of necessary parties. Facts leading to the filing of the present petition are as follows.

(2.) ELECTIONS to the 2nd respondent, Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee were held on 5th April, 1998. The result of the elections were declared on 16th April, 1998. Petitioner and respondent No. 3 were amongst the several candidates, who contested from the Co-operative Societies Constituency in which seven seats were reserved. 5 candidates who had secured more than 48 votes were declared elected. Petitioner, respondent No. 3 and one Shelar Damodar Chau, all secured equal votes each having secured 48 votes. Therefore, a draw was held under Rule 80 of the Rules and the petitioner and the said Shelar were declared elected. Taking exception to the declaration of the results of election, respondent No. 3 preferred an appeal, being Appeal No. 2 of 1998, before the Collector, challenging election of the petitioner. Although respondent No. 3 had impleaded all the contesting candidates the appeal was pressed only against the petitioner. By an order passed on 15th July, 1998 the appeal of respondent No. 3 was allowed and the petitioner was held ineligible to contest for one amongst the seven posts from the Co-operative Societies Constituency and respondent No. 3 was held to have been duly elected.

(3.) TAKING exception to the aforesaid decision of the Collector, the petitioner on 10th August, 1998 preferred an appeal being Appeal No. 19 of 1998 under Rule 88 (3) of the said Rules to the Commissioner. In this appeal, the petitioner had impleaded only respondent No. 3. By the impugned order passed on 8th August, 1998 the petitioners appeal has been dismissed on the ground of non joinder of the remaining contesting candidates to the appeal. Taking exception to the aforesaid order the petitioner has preferred the present petition.