ASHOK YESHVANTRAO KHARADE Vs. KESHAVRAO SANTOSHRAO DEHANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the appointment of the 1st respondent as Chairman of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Katol, District Nagpur. The petitioners are agriculturists by occupation at Katol. The 1st respondent is carrying on the occupation as a trader at Katol. The 2nd respondent is the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Katol, District Nagpur (for short "apmc" ).

(2.) IN order to regulate marketing of agricultural and certain other produce in market areas and for establishing markets therefor, the State Legislature enacted the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ). The aim of the Act is to eliminate exploitation of agriculturists by middlemen and to eliminate unfair trading/marketing practices employed by such middlemen. Pursuant to section 11 of the Act, an APMC was established for the revenue area comprising Tahsil Katol, District Nagpur by the name Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Katol. Under the Act every APMC constituted under the Act is a body corporate with perpetual succession and common seal. It is also deemed to be the local authority for all purposes contemplated under section 12 of the Act. The Chairman of the Committee exercises several public functions and performs duties of a public nature. Rule 92 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Rules, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") enunciates the functions and powers of the Chairman of the Committee. There does not appear to be any dispute that the Chairman holds a public office and, consequently, is amenable to writ jurisdiction.

(3.) THE Act provides that every market committee shall be presided over by the Chairman elected by the APMC from amongst its elected agriculturists. Section 19 of the Act which deals with this subject reads as under :