CHANDGI RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE circumstances leading to this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India are these. Prior to the 8th of May, 1970, when the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets (Haryana Amendment) Ordinance (Haryana Ordinance No. 6 of 1970 and hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance) was promulgated, all the members, except one who was to be appointed by the State Government from amongst its officials, of every Market Committee in the State of Haryana used to be elected under the provisions of sub -section (2) of section 12 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act). The Ordinance amended the Act so as to substitute the method of nomination by the State Government for that of election in respect of all the members of a Market Committee. On the 18th of September, 1970, the Ordinance was replaced by the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets (Haryana Amendment) Act (Haryana Act No. 25 of 1970 and hereinafter referred to as the Amending Act), the provisions of which are practically identical with those of the Ordinance.

(2.) GROUND (i) is without substance, in view of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Hargain Singh and others v. The State of Haryana and others Civil Writ No. 2756 of 1970, decided on the 4th of May, 1971, in which the vires of the Ordinance and the Amending Act have been upheld.

(3.) IN connection with ground (ii) Shri D.R. Puri Learned Counsel for respondent No. 7, and the learned Deputy Advocate General (Haryana) have raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the petitioner is not entitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India without first approaching the Deputy Commissioner of the District in which respondent No. 7 carries on his avocation for determination of the question as to whether or not respondent No. 7 is a "producer" as defined in clause (o) of section 2 of the Act. That clause states: