- (1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner questioning the proceedings of the meeting of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Chittorgarh ("Market Committee") dated 10.10.14 convened for consideration of 'No Confidence Motion' against the petitioner, the Chairperson of the Market Committee, which is carried by majority of votes in terms of provisions of sub-section (11) (b) of Section 7 of Rajasthan Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1961 ( for short "the Act") and thus, the petitioner stands ousted from the office of Chairperson of the Market Committee.
(2.) The petitioner was elected as Member of Market Committee in the year 2011 and thereafter, she was elected as Chairperson of the Market Committee on 26.9.11. On 30.9.14, six members of the Market Committee out of eleven members moved a motion of no confidence against the petitioner by giving notice in terms of provisions of Section 11 (a) of the Act. Pursuant thereto, Authorised Officer vide notice dated 1.10.14 convened the meeting of the Market Committee for consideration of 'No Confidence Motion'. The 'No Confidence Motion' was considered by the Market Committee in its meeting held on 10.10.14. After deliberation, the motion was put to vote. All the seven members present voted for the motion and thus, it stands carried by a majority in terms of provisions of sub-section (11) (b) of Section 7 of the Act. Hence, this petition.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that three nominated members of the Market Committee who had not subscribed an oath as per the mandate of the provisions of sub-section (10) of Section 7 of the Act participated in the meeting and voted for the motion and therefore, the entire proceedings stand vitiated on this count alone. Learned counsel submitted that it is alleged that the nominated members took the oath of the office in the general meeting of the Market Committee convened on 2.9.14 whereas, no such meeting was ever convened. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner who is Chairperson of the Market Committee is not aware about any such meeting being convened. Learned counsel submitted that in the minutes of the meeting dated 2.9.14, it is recorded that the newly nominated members subscribed an oath but it stands falsified from bare perusal of the minutes of the meeting wherein, there are no signatures of any members of the Market Committee. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner came to know about the meeting alleged to have been held on 2.9.14 only when the minutes of the meeting were placed before her by the Secretary of the Market Committee for signature on 8.10.14. Learned counsel submitted that as a matter of fact, the respondents in their anxiety to leaglise their illegality, got the minutes signed by the members of the Market Committee. Learned counsel submitted that the nominated members of the Market Committee namely, Shanti Lal Menaria and Madan Lal Jhanwar have not taken oath in prescribed form and therefore, they were not entitled to participate and vote in the meeting of the Market Committee. Learned counsel submitted that if the nominated members are excluded, only four members were present in the meeting dated 10.10.14 whereas, for carrying the motion, presence of five members was necessary.;