KIRAN SINGH Vs. THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, who is Ex- Chairman of the Agricultural Market Committee, Palwal (for short 'the Committee') has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for quashing the impugned order dated 04.01.1993 (Annexure P3), vide which the petitioner was asked to show cause as to why the loss of Rs. 2,00,000.00 caused by him to the Market Committee be not recovered from him. The petitioner also sought the quashing of recovery notice dated 22.11.1993 (Annexure P5), vide which the Assistant Collector, 2nd Class, Palwal asked the petitioner to deposit Rs. 2,00,000.00 as arrears of land revenue.

(2.) The petitioner remained Chairman of the Market Committee, Palwal from 07.05.1990 till 12.05.1991. There were sixteen other members of the Market Committee. It is claimed that on 07.04.1960, respondent No.2-Market Committee had allotted one plot to Murari Lal Ashok Kumar for Rs. 250.00 through a unanimous resolution. Sale letter dated 06.09.1964 is Annexure P1. Later on, the possession of the said plot was delivered to said Murari Lal Ashok Kumar. An application of Murari Lal Ashok Kumar for allotment of plot in lieu of the plot allotted to him on 07.04.1960 was listed in the meeting of the Market Committee held on 19.03.1991. The information was obtained regarding said plot No.280. It came out that from time to time, alterations have been made in the map of Grain Market, Palwal. Therefore, for this reason, the plot No.280 could not be allotted to Murari Lal Ashok Kumar, according to old map. However, other plot holders were delivered the possession. Therefore, the Market Committee unanimously passed a resolution on 19.03.1991, allotting plot No.201 to Murari Lal Ashok Kumar in lieu of earlier plot No.280. The possession of plot No.201 was accordingly delivered to him. The said resolution was annulled by the Chief Administrator, Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board, while exercising powers under Sec. 33(4) (I) of Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 (for short 'the Market Act'). Impugned notice, dated 04.01.1993 (Annexure P3) was also issued to the petitioner for depositing of Rs. 2,00,000.00 as loss caused to the Market Committee due to his wrongful act. The petitioner wrote a letter to respondent No.1 on 01.01.1993, seeking necessary information to submit the reply. Respondent No.1 passed the impugned order dated 04.01.1993 (Annexure P3) asking the petitioner to deposit Rs. 2,00,000.00. The petitioner claims that he has not been given opportunity of hearing by a written notice as required under Sections 29 and 33(4)(I) of the Market Act. The petitioner also claims that all the seventeen members have passed the resolution/ order and liability could not be exclusively fastened upon him. The action of the respondents is in violation of Sections 29 and 33(4)(I) of the Market Act and also hit by Art. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) The stand of respondent No.2 is that the petitioner has got equally efficacious alternative remedy by way of filing revision before the State Government under Sec. 42 of the Market Act. Therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.