Lata v. District Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Yavatmal
2016-01-14
Z.A.HAQ
body2016
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT : Heard Shri Abhay Sambre, advocate for the petitioner, Shri S.S. Paliwal, advocate for respondents 3 and 6 and Shri Vishal P. Gangane, A.G.P. for respondent No. 1. The respondents 4 and 5 had submitted their nomination papers and, therefore, they were impleaded as party to this petition, however, subsequently they have withdrawn the nomination papers and considering this fact notice was issued to respondents 1, 2 and 3 by the order dated 5th January, 2016. This petition can be disposed of without issuing notice to respondents 4 and 5 and without hearing them for the above reasons. Shri Paliwal submitted that the respondent No. 6 has filed the caveat. On facts, he states that the respondent No. 6 had also submitted the nomination paper but subsequently it is withdrawn. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 3. The elections of Agricultural Market Produce Committee, Ner are scheduled for 17th January, 2016. Out of 19 seats available for members from different categories, one seat from Gram Panchayat category is reserved for candidate from "Economically Weaker Section". The petitioner as well as the respondents 3, 4, 5 and 6 submitted their nomination papers offering their candidature for the seat reserved for "Economically Weaker Section". The respondent No. 6 had objected to the candidature of petitioner on the ground that she does not belong to "Economically Weaker Section". The Returning Officer, considered the objection and overruling it accepted the nomination paper of the petitioner. The respondents 3 and 6 challenged the decision of the Returning Officer in appeal which is decided by the District Deputy Registrar by the impugned order. The learned District Deputy Registrar, relying on a circular styled as "order" dated 5th May, 2001 upheld the contentions of the respondents 3 and 6 and set aside the decision of the Returning Officer to accept the nomination paper of the petitioner. The effect is that the nomination paper of the petitioner is rejected. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order passed by the respondent No. 1 District Deputy Registrar, has filed this writ petition. 4. After hearing the learned advocates for the petitioner and respondents 3 and 6 and the learned A.G.P., it was noticed that the above circular dated 5th May, 2001 has been issued by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (c) of Explanation to section 73-B of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
4. After hearing the learned advocates for the petitioner and respondents 3 and 6 and the learned A.G.P., it was noticed that the above circular dated 5th May, 2001 has been issued by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (c) of Explanation to section 73-B of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. By this circular, the State Government has laid down the guidelines for determining as to which member or class of members belong to "Economically Weaker Section". The terms 'Small Farmer", "Agricultural Labourer" and "Persons below poverty line" are defined/explained in the above circular. On perusal of the above circular, it is noticed that the circular has been issued for the purposes of section 73-B of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The above referred circular cannot be applied for the purposes of elections of Agricultural Produce Market Committees. The State Government enacted the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963 (for short "Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964") to develop and regulate marketing of agricultural and certain other produce in market areas and markets including private markets and farmer-consumer markets to be established therefor in the State; to confer powers upon Market Committees to be constituted in connection with or acting for purposes connected with such markets; to establish Market Fund for purposes of the Market Committees and to provide for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid. Section 60(1) and (2) of the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 gives powers to the State Government to make Rules for carrying into effect and purposes of the Act for the matters as specified in section 60(2) of the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964. In exercise of the powers conferred by section 60(1) and (2) of the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964, the State Government has made the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967 (for short "Rules of 1967"). Chapter III of the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 provides for the constitution of Market Committees. Section 11 of the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 provides for establishment of Market Committees. Section 12 provides for incorporation of Market Committees. Section 13 provides for constitution of Market Committees. Section 14 provides for the conduct of elections and term of office of members. Section 14-A provides for the procedure for regulating the Election Fund.
Section 11 of the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 provides for establishment of Market Committees. Section 12 provides for incorporation of Market Committees. Section 13 provides for constitution of Market Committees. Section 14 provides for the conduct of elections and term of office of members. Section 14-A provides for the procedure for regulating the Election Fund. Section 15 provides for commencement of term of office of members. Section 15A provides for the provisions for appointment of Administrator after normal or extended term of office of members expires and section 16 provides for the procedure regarding resignation of members and nomination in certain circumstances. Section 17 provides for removal of member for misconduct and section 18 provides regarding casual vacancies. Sections 19, 20, 21, 21A, 22 and 23 of the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 deal with the election terms and other ancillary matters relating to Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Committees. Chapter III of the Rules of 1967 provides for the Rules regarding constitution of Market Committee, administrative machinery for the conduct of election and the manner in which the elections are to be conducted. Rule 88 of the Rules of 1967 provides for the mechanism for determination of validity of election. Thus, it is clear that the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 and the Rules of 1967 provide for complete Code. In this background, it cannot be accepted that the circular issued on 5th May, 2001 for the purposes of section 73-B of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 can be applied for determining the eligibility of the candidate contesting election for the Market Committee. It is well established that the right to contest is a statutory right and is regulated by the concerned Statute. The right of the petitioner to contest the election for the seat of member of Market Committee as a candidate from "Economically Weaker Section" is regulated by the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 and the Rules of 1967. The learned A.G.P. and the learned advocate for respondents 3 and 6 have not been able to point out any provision under the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 and the Rules of 1967 on the basis of which the petitioner can be declared ineligible to contest the election. 5. In addition, one more relevant and important aspect is required to be noted.
5. In addition, one more relevant and important aspect is required to be noted. The Explanation (c) below section 73-B of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 under which the above referred Circular dated 5th May, 2001 is issued is deleted by Maharashtra Act No. 16 of 2013 w.e.f. 4th February, 2013. The circular dated 5th May, 2001 is issued by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (c) of the Explanation to section 73-B of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and as the provision itself is deleted, the circular loses its efficacy and cannot have any binding and statutory force. 6. For the above reasons, it has to be held that the order passed by the respondent No. 1 District Deputy Registrar allowing the appeal filed by the respondents 3 and 6 is unsustainable. 7. Hence, the following order : (i) The order passed by the District Deputy Registrar in Appeal No. 1/2015 on 30th December, 2015 is set aside. (ii) The Appeal No. 1/2015 filed by the respondents 3 and 6 is dismissed. (iii) The decision of the Returning Officer accepting the nomination paper of the petitioner is restored. (iv) It is directed that the respondents 1 and 2 shall consider the petitioner as validly nominated candidate for the election for the seat of member of Agricultural Market Produce Committee, Ner from Gram Panchayat category as an "Economically Weaker Section" candidate. (v) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. (vi) In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs. 8. Shri R.B. Deo, learned Associate Advocate General assisted by Shri Vishal P. Gangane, learned A.G.P., on instructions from the concerned department, has submitted that it is revealed that the statutory requirements for adopting the circular dated 5th May, 2001 for the purposes of Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 have not been followed. After hearing, it is further noticed that there are no guidelines to determine as to which member or class of members can be considered to be belonging to "Economically Weaker Section". In the absence of any guidelines issued as per the requirements of Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 it will not be possible to give effect to the provisions of section 13(1)(a)(ii) of the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 providing reservation of one seat for person belonging to "Economically Weaker Section".
In the absence of any guidelines issued as per the requirements of Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 it will not be possible to give effect to the provisions of section 13(1)(a)(ii) of the Maharashtra Act No. XX of 1964 providing reservation of one seat for person belonging to "Economically Weaker Section". Therefore, it is expedient that the State Government frames the proper guidelines at the earliest possible. 9. The learned A.G.P. shall send copy of this judgment to the concerned department for necessary action, pointing out the exigency of situation.