- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner so also the respondents. By the present petition the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing of the impugned order dated 18.3.2008 where under the Government of Maharashtra has nominated board of directors of Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Akkalkot. The petitioner further seeks writ of mandamus against respondent No.1 to complete election process of Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Akkalkot within stipulated time frame.
(2.) Few facts that are necessary to adjudicate the issue raised in the present writ petition are narrated herein below: The then existing Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Akkalkot was bifurcated into two market committees under the name and style of (i) Akkalkot Agricultural Produce Market Committee and (ii) Dudhani Agricultural Produce Market Committee vide order dated 14.8.2007 passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies exercising of powers of the State Government. The said bifurcation was ordered in exercise of powers conferred under section 44 of The Maharashtra Agriculture Produce Marketing (Development & Regulation) Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The bifurcation was challenged by filing Writ Petition No. 6105/07 by Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Akkalkot. Perusal of the judgment in the said writ petition dated 22.8.2007 reveals that all the challenges raised to the bifurcation were rejected. Immediately after the bifurcation and after coming into existence of newly formed market committee an administrator came to be appointed. In the judgment rendered in Writ Petition No.6105/07 the appointment of the Administrator has been held to be an adhoc arrangement pending appointment of the Chairman, Vice Chairman and other members of the managing committee of the newly constituted market committees. Thus under the scheme prevailing prior to insertion of second proviso to section 13(2) of the Act this Court held that the administrator was appointed pending appointment of the Chairman and vice Chairman and other members of the managing committee. The judgment in the said writ petition was delivered on 22.8.2007 and the Administrator continued till the Government issued the order impugned in the present writ petition dated 18.3.2008 nominating the board of directors. In the intervening period section 13(2) came to be amended and second proviso came to be inserted in subsection (2). Thus the amended provision of subsection (2) reads thus: "(2) When a Market Committee is constituted for the first time, (whether under subsection (1) [(1A) or (1B)] all the members thereof and the Chairman and Vice Chairman shall be nominated by the State Government. [Provided that, the Chairman and Vice Chairman shall be so nominated from amongst the agriculturists members.] [Provided further that, the State Government may, if it considers expedient, instead of nominating the members of the Market Committee constituted for the first time, appoint an Administrator or the Board of Administrators, and the Administrator or the Board of Administrators, so appointed, shall, for all purposes, be considered to be the committee constituted for the first time.]" Section 14(3) lays down that members of the Market Committee (not being a Committee constituted for the first time) shall hold office for a period of five years and the members of the Committee constituted for the first time shall hold office for a period two years.
(3.) Second proviso was inserted in subsection (2) of section 13 by Maharashtra Ordinance I of 2008 with effect from 22.1.2008. In the present case the Administrator was appointed prior to the said amendment and thus this Court in the writ petition referred to herein above had held that the appointment of the Administrator was an adhoc arrangement pending constitution of the new committee by appointing board of directors. It is thus clear that the appointment of the Administrator was not an act done by the State in a situation covered by second proviso to subsection (2) which vests the State Government with a discretion, if it considers expedient, instead of nominating members of the market committee, appoint an administrator or board of Administrators and the administrator or the board of administrators so appointed shall for all purposes be considered to be the Committee constituted for the first time. Thus by insertion of second proviso the State Government has been given an option either to appoint the Administrator or nominate the members of the Market Committee and in the event if the Government opts to appoint an Administrator, such appointment of an Administrator shall be considered to be the Committee constituted for the first time. Under the newly inserted second proviso the State Government has two options; one to appoint an Administrator and two to nominate members of the Market Committee constituted for the first time.;