ORDER : Petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 24-2-2016 passed by respondent No. 1 by which order dated 13-3-2015 (Annexure P/4) resolution No. 17 dated 23-3-2015 passed by Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Indore has been set aside. 2. Facts of the case are as under. Petitioner is a society registered under the provisions of the M.P. Society Registration Act, 1973. The working Committee of the society has passed resolution in favour of the President and Secretary to file the present petition. The petitioner is a society of commission agent of potato, garlic and onion who receives commission, consideration or percentage of the amount involved in the transaction of agricultural produce from traders. To establish marketing board and various Krishi Upaj Mandi in the entire State of M.P. the State Government has enacted a law called Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972 (for short ‘the Adhiniyam 1972’). Under section 80 of the Adhiniyam the market Committee of the respective Mandi may make bye-laws in respect of the market area under its management to regulate its business, condition of trading and market duties and functioning of the Committee, sub Committee and market functionaries etc. Under section 81 power has been given to the Managing Director of the Mandi Board to direct Mandis to make or amend any bye-laws and if the petitioner Committee fails to make any bye-laws or amend bye-laws within the time frame the bye-laws framed by the Managing Director would be binding on the market Committee. An appeal shall lie to the State Government from any order of the Managing Director under sub-section (2). The bye-laws framed under section 80 by the Mandi Committee are also required to be confirmed by the MD. 3. The M.P. State Marketing Board has framed bye-laws in the year 2000 to regulate sale and purchase of vegetables in the Krishi Upaj Mandi. They are commonly known as Mandi Samimityom Ke Liye Upadvidhi 2000. Chapter 4 of the Regulation 16 deals with the control of marketing of scheduled agricultural products. These model bye-laws have been adopted by the each and every Mandi Committee of the State including respondent No. 4. They are commonly known as Mandi Samimityom Ke Liye Upadvidhi 2000. Chapter 4 of the Regulation 16 deals with the control of marketing of scheduled agricultural products. These model bye-laws have been adopted by the each and every Mandi Committee of the State including respondent No. 4. According to the petitioner under this bye law garlic has to be treated as vegetable not as spice because it is perishable like vegetables and the commission agents do not recover any commission from the agriculturist but recover only from the traders and they also deposits the Mandi fess also to the Krishi Upaj Mandi. 4. The Managing Director vide order dated 13-3-2015 (Annexure P/4) has directed all the Mandis to amend the bye-laws 2000 by inserting clause (16) (7) for garlic (dry and wet) which is in the category of spices and others are to be treated under the category of fruits and vegetables because garlic is a perishable commodity. The proposed amendment is reproduced below:- ¼1½ mifof/k lu~ & 2000 ds v/;k; pkj esa eaMh lfefr }kjk vf/klwfpr d`f"k mit ds foi.ku dk fu;a=.k gsrq fu/kkZfjr dafMdk 16 esa la'kks/ku mijkar fuEukuqlkj uohu mica/k ¼7½ dks LFkkfir fd;k tk, %& ¼16½ ¼7½ & ;g fd d`f"k mit ^^yglqu ¼xhyk rFkk lq[kk½** 'kh?kz u"V gksusokyh ¼isjh'kscy deksfMVh½ gS tks fd d`f"k mit eaMh vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 1¼d½ dh vuqlwph nl ds vUrxZr ^^pVuh elkys rFkk vU; oLrq,** Js.kh esa vkrs gS ds foi.ku gsrq d`f"k mit eaMh lfefr dh bl vifof/k ds mijksDr mica/k esa fu/kkZfjr Á.kkyh ds vfrfjDr mi;qDr oSdfYid ikjn'khZ Á.kkyh ;Fkk Áfrfuf/k ¼edh'ku ,tsaV½ ds ek/;e ls vf/klwfpr d`f"k mit ds foi.ku] ?kks"k foØ; lapkyu bR;kfn dks mlh Ádkj Hkh fofu;fer fd;k tk ldsxk tSls fd ^^Qy lCth foi.ku ds fy;s mifof/k lu~ 2000 ds Áko/kkuksa esa micaf/kr gS] fdUrq bl oSdfYid O;oLFkk esa dh xbZ dksbZ Hkh ckr ls d`f"k mit ^^yglqu ¼xhyk rFkk lq[kk½** dks eaMh vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 1¼d½ dh vuqlwph lkr rFkk ^^Qy** ;k vuqlwph vkB ;Fkk ^^lCth** ds varxZr ugha le>k tkosxkA 5. The Krishi Upaj Mandi vide its resolution dated 23-3-2015 No. 17 has passed the resolution to include the aforesaid clause in the bye-laws of 2000. 6. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid amendment in the bye-laws respondent No. 5 (Mukesh Somani) filed Writ Petition No. 66661/15 before this Court. The Krishi Upaj Mandi vide its resolution dated 23-3-2015 No. 17 has passed the resolution to include the aforesaid clause in the bye-laws of 2000. 6. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid amendment in the bye-laws respondent No. 5 (Mukesh Somani) filed Writ Petition No. 66661/15 before this Court. By order dated 8-10-2015 the writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the competent authority within 15 days. Respondent No. 5 filed an appeal before the State Government on 19-1-2016 in compliance of the High Court order. Respondent No. 6 intervened in the said appeal as intervener. Respondent No. 7 Nand Kishore has also filed an appeal directly before the State Government on 26-6-2015 under section 81(3) of the Adhiniyam. Simultaneously respondent No. 5 also filed civil suit for permanent injunction against the petitioner as well as against the Mandi seeking injunction against the defendant. 7. Vide order dated 24-2-2016 (Annexure P/9) respondent No. 1 has allowed the appeal and set aside the order of Managing Director dated 31-2-13 and resolution of the Krishi Upaj Mandi, Indore dated 23-3-2015 on the ground that the said order and resolution is amounting to amendment of Schedule 1 of schedule appended to the Mandi Adhiniyam because State Government is competent to amend the schedule. 8. Being aggrieved by the order of respondent No. 1 dated 24-2-2016 the petitioner filed writ petition before this Court. Vide order dated 14-3-2016 notices were issued to the respondents and vide order dated 21-3-2016 operation of the impugned order passed by the State Government was stayed which is in operation till today. After notice respondents No. 1, 2, 3 and 5 filed the return along with application for vacating stay. 9. With the consent of parties instead of hearing the petition on vacating stay the writ petition is finally heard and decided. 10. Shri A.K. Sethi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that respondent No. 1 has wrongly set aside the order of the Managing Director and the resolution on the ground that the said order and resolution are amounting to amendment in the schedule. The Managing Director in its order dated 31-3-2015 has specifically mentioned that this order be not treated as amendment in the schedule and the garlic would remain in the category of spices. The Managing Director in its order dated 31-3-2015 has specifically mentioned that this order be not treated as amendment in the schedule and the garlic would remain in the category of spices. He further submits that under section 81 sub-section (3) the limitation for filing appeal is 30 days. Admittedly, respondents No. 5 and 7 preferred appeal beyond the period of 30 days without application for condonation of delay. The State Government has not condoned the delay and entertained the appeal on merit. The members of the petitioner are strictly working under the provisions of section 32 sub-section (5) and not charging any commission or Dalali from the sale proceeds payable to the agriculturist/sellers. They are charging fees, commission or Dalali from the traders and the purchasers. It is further submitted that the Managing Director has amended bye-laws of 2000 treating garlic (wet and dry) as perishable item like fruits and vegetables. It is still within the schedule, therefore, State Government has wrongly treated that the schedule has been amended by the impugned order and resolution. By order of the Managing Director and Mandi Committee, substantial justice has been done with commission agents, hence order passed by the State Government is liable to be set aside. 11. Shri Dave, learned G.A. on behalf of the respondent No. 1 submits that only State Government is competent to amend the schedule and by the order of the Managing Director and the resolution of the Mandi Board virtually the schedule has been amended which is beyond their competency, therefore, State Government has rightly set aside the same. The garlic cannot be treated as vegetables and specially kept in the different schedule than the vegetables and the intention of the legislature is not to sell garlic through agents. The bye-laws of 2000 has been framed only for marketing of fruits and vegetables. 12. Shri Kamal Airen on behalf of the Krishi Upaj Mandi, Indore submits that before passing the said order and resolution representations were received by the Chief Minister of M.P. from the Bhartiya Kisan Sangh requesting that garlic be permitted to sold through commission agents and it would be in the interest of farmers. A comparative assessment was made and it was found that if the potato, onion and garlic is sold through commission agent it would be in the interest of farmers and small traders. A comparative assessment was made and it was found that if the potato, onion and garlic is sold through commission agent it would be in the interest of farmers and small traders. Considering these representations and note sheet of the State Government the Managing Director has decided to direct Mandis to amend the bye-laws and accordingly all the Mandis have amended their bye-laws of 2000. The MD as well as Mandis are competent under sections 80 and 81 respectively of the Adhiniyam to amend bye-laws. 13. Shri C.L. Yadav, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No. 5, 6 and 7 argued in support of the order passed by the State Government and submits that writ petition was filed before this Court against the order of MD in which High Court has granted liberty and time limit to file appeal and within 15 days appeal was filed, therefore, same cannot be treated as time barred. The facts and relief claimed in the civil suit are altogether different. The Mandi and the MD are not competent to amend schedule appended to the Act. Earlier some of the farmers approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No. 4830/06, W.P. No. 6078/06 alleging that garlic is spice and no Arath could be charged on the said commodity. The Joint Director of Marketing Board on 20-9-07 has also clarified that there should be no Arath/commission in the sale of garlic. He further submits that under section 60 the power vested that the State Government to amend the schedule and under section 80(1) the MD can amend bye-laws only in the interest of market and market Committee. The market Committee is defined in section 2(I), therefore, MD cannot amend bye-laws in the interest of the petitioner. In support of his contention he has placed reliance in the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Agricultural Market Committee v. Shalimar Chemical Works Ltd., reported in (1997) 5 SCC 516 . 14. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. 15. The provisions of the Adhiniyam which has been referred in the argument are reproduced below: 32. Power to grant licences. 14. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. 15. The provisions of the Adhiniyam which has been referred in the argument are reproduced below: 32. Power to grant licences. — (1) Every person specified in section 31 who desires to operate in the market area shall apply to the market Committee for grant of a licence or renewal thereof in such manner and within such period as may be prescribed by bye-laws. (2) Every such application shall be accompanied by such fee as the Director may, subject to the limits prescribed specify in this behalf (3) The market Committee may grant or renew the licence or for reasons to be recorded in writing refuse to grant or renew the licence: [Provided that if the market Committee fails to grant or renew a licence within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of application therefore the licence shall be deemed to have been granted or renewed, as the case may be.] [Provided further that the licence shall not be renewed, if any Mandi Committee dues including dues under the Madhya Pradesh Nirashriton Avam Nirdhan Vyaktion Ki Sahayata Adhiniyam, 1970 are outstanding against the applicant: Provided also that no licence shall be granted to a minor]. (4) All licences granted or renewed under this section shall be subject to the provisions of this Act and the rules and bye-laws made thereunder. [(5) No commission agent or a broker or both shall act in any transaction between the agriculturist-seller or trader-purchaser, on behalf of an agriculturist seller nor shall he deduct any amount towards commission or dalali from the sale proceeds payable to the agriculturist-seller.] 60. Power of State Government to amend Schedule. — The State Government may, by notification add to amend or delete any of the items of agricultural produce specified in the Schedule and thereupon the Schedule shall be deemed to be amended accordingly: Provided that no notification shall be issued under this section without giving in the Gazette previous notice of not less than six weeks as the State Government may consider reasonable of its intention to issue such notification. 80. Power to make bye-laws. 80. Power to make bye-laws. — (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, a Market Committee may, in respect of a market area under its management, make bye-laws for— (i) the regulation of its business; (ii) the conditions of trading in a market; (iii) delegation of powers, duties and functions to the officers and servants, appointment, pay, punishment, pensions, gratuities, leave, leave allowances, contributions by them to any provident fund which may be established for the benefit of such officers and servants and other conditions of service; (iv) the delegation of powers, duties and functions, to a subcommittee, if any; (v) market functionaries who shall be required to take licence; (vi) any other matter for which bye-laws are to be made under this Act or it may be necessary to frame bye-laws for effectively implementing the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder in the market area. (2) No by e-law made under sub-section (1) shall take effect until it has been confirmed by the (Managing Director). (3) In making any by e-law the Market Committee may direct that a breach thereof shall be punishable with fine which may extend to (one hundred rupees) and where the breach is a continuing one with further fine which may extend to five rupees for every day after first during which the breach is proved to have been persisted in. 81. Power of Director to direct making or amendment of bye-laws. — (1) If it appears to the Managing Director that it is necessary or desirable in the interests of a Market Committee to make any by e-law or to amend any bye-law, he may, by order, require the Market Committee concerned to make the bye-laws or the amendment of the bye-law within such time as he may specify in such order. (2) If the Market Committee fails to make such bye-laws or such amendment of the bye-laws within the time specified, the opportunity of being heard by an order make such bye-law or such amendment of the bye-law and thereupon subject to any order under sub-section (3), such bye-law or such amendment of the bye-law shall be deemed to have been made or amended by the Market Committee in accordance with the provision of this Act or the rules made thereunder and thereupon such bye-law or amendment shall be binding on the Market Committee. (3) An appeal shall lie to the State Go vernment from any order of the (Managing Director) under sub-section (2) within thirty days from the date of such order and the order of the State Government on such appeal shall be final. SCHEDULE VIII-Vegetable 1. Common bear or broad bean, 2. Kidney bean, 3. Indian Bean, 4. Sem Barbato, 5. Cluster bean/Gawrfalli, 6. Brinjal, 7. Cabbage, 8. Cauliflower, 9. Chowli pag or bagi/Chowlai sag, 10. Chowli (Red), 11. Chukta/khatta palak, 12. Sponge gourd/Turai, 13. Bitter gourd/Karela, 14. Bottle gourd/Laoki, 15. Pumkin/Kumda, 16. Kundroo, 17. Padval, 18. Knol-Khol, 19. Methi, 20. Spinach/Palak bhaji, 21. Purslame or ghole leaves/Bhol bhaji, 22. Lady fiinger/Bhindi, 23. Tomato, 24. Garden peas/Matar, 25. Jack fruit/Kathal, 26. Ghuiane/Arv, 27. Beet Root/Chukandar, 28. Carrot/Gajar, 29. Onion, 30. Potatoes, 31. Sweet potato, 32. Raddish, 33. Turnip/Salgum, 34. Tinda, 35. Suran, 36. Other green and fresh vegetables. X-Condiments, spices and others 1. Chillies (Wet and dry), 2. Corriander seed, 3. Turmaric, Curcuma, 4. Garlic (Wet and dry), 5. Ginger (Wet and dry), 6. Methi dana, 7. Aniseed, 8. Tamarind, 9. Sonf 10. Cumi seed/Jira, 11. Rai, 12. Asgandh, 13. Poppy seed and Poppy husk. Section 2. Definitions. — (1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, (a) “agricultural produce” means all produce (x x x) of agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry, apiculture, pisciculture, or forest as specified in the Schedule (g) “Market” means a market established under section 4; (h) “market area” means the area for which a market is established under section 4; (i) “market Committee” means a Committee constituted under section 11; 16. That as per definition of agricultural produce under section 2(1)(a) it means all produce of agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry, apiculture, pisciculture, or forest as specified in this Schedule. The schedule is appended to the Act provide a list of agricultural produce in different categories like vegetables and spices and others. Hence there is only one schedule in the Act in which the various agricultural produces has been arrayed in the different categories. The only question involved in the petition whether impugned resolution and the order passed by the Mandi and M.D. respectively amounts to amendment in the schedule. 17. Since the question of law involved in this petition and appeal has been decided by the respondent No. 1 then whether same was filed within limitation or not. The only question involved in the petition whether impugned resolution and the order passed by the Mandi and M.D. respectively amounts to amendment in the schedule. 17. Since the question of law involved in this petition and appeal has been decided by the respondent No. 1 then whether same was filed within limitation or not. The said question is not required to be given serious consideration by this Court because the appeal has been decided on merit. Though there is a limitation prescribed under section 81(3) to file appeal within 30 days but respondent No. 5 instead of filing appeal has approached this Court after four months of passing resolution but this Court has granted liberty of 15 days to file the appeal. The appeal was filed and has been decided by the Government on merit in compliance of directions of High Court, therefore, it is not necessary to go into the issue of limitation whether appeal was preferred within time or delay was condoned or not. The petitioner has participated in the appeal and did not raise any objection. Hence, objection taken by Shri Sethi about limitation is rejected. 18. That the section 32 of the Adhiniyam provides power to grant license. Every person specified in section 31 who desires to operate in the market area shall apply to the market Committee for grant of a license or renewal thereof in such manner and within such period as may be prescribed by the bye-laws. Under section 5 there is a restriction that the commission agent or broker or both shall act in any transaction between the agriculturist and traders on behalf of the agriculturist but shall not deduct any amount of Dalali payable to the said agriculturist. Shri Sethi, senior counsel is giving an undertaking that the members of the petitioner society have never charged any commission from the agriculturist and in future also they will not charge. Even otherwise there is no allegation that the agents have charged any commission from the agriculturist. 19. Under section 60 power has been given to the State Government to amend the schedule and according to which State Government may by notification add or amend or delete any of the item of the agricultural produce specified in the schedule. Meaning thereby State Government can add new product in the schedule or delete any agricultural produce from the schedule. Under section 60 power has been given to the State Government to amend the schedule and according to which State Government may by notification add or amend or delete any of the item of the agricultural produce specified in the schedule. Meaning thereby State Government can add new product in the schedule or delete any agricultural produce from the schedule. In the present case garlic (wet and dry) has neither been added in the schedule nor deleted by the impugned order or resolution, therefore, such act does not amount to amendment in the schedule. 20. The Mandi Committee has been given authority to amend the bye-laws and under section 81 the Managing Director has been given power to amend bye laws by condition No. 16(7). If the Managing Director and Mandi Committee has amended bye-laws of 2000 then it is within their authority, therefore, State Government has wrongly set aside the order and resolution of the Managing Director on the pretext that such an act amounts to amendment in the schedule. 21. The Managing Director can direct the Mandi Committee to amend the bye-laws if it appears to him that it is necessary and desirable. The petitioner Committee is constituted under section 11 and market is defined in section 4. Market is established to regulate marketing of notified produce. In the market the agriculturist shall sell their produce to the purchasers. The market is established for the benefit of the agriculturist and traders. In fact, Mandi is established in the interest of the agriculturist and sellers so that they may get better price for their produce, therefore, any bye-laws which are framed or amended that would be deemed to have in the interest of farmers. In the present case it is established from the return of the Krishi Upaj Mandi that agriculturist represented that the garlic be permitted to be sold through agents and the State Government has recommended. Accordingly, it was found necessary by the Managing Director and he directed to amend the bye-laws, therefore, considering the provisions of law and the material on record State Government has wrongly set aside the order of the M.P. dated 31-3-2015 and the resolution passed by the Mandi Committee dated 23-3-2015, hence impugned order is set aside. 22. Writ petition stands allowed. No order as to cost. Petition allowed.