Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sadashiv Shivaji Dhenge, was elected as Sarpanch of Gram-Panchayat Hardoli in 2017, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of respondent No.6-APMC, Tumsar. The regular term of the elected members of APMC expired on 20.09.2021, but elections were delayed and finally scheduled for 10.02.2023. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the election process, arguing that the authorities were proceeding with the election without including the names of members/Sarpanch of 58 Gram-Panchayats from Mohadi Tahsil in the voters' list, which is mandatory under Section 11(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development & Regulation) Act, 1963. The court examined the provisions of the Act and found that the authorities have a duty to include such names. The court held that the omission was illegal and set aside the election process, directing the respondents to include the names of the members/Sarpanch of the 58 Gram-Panchayats in the voters' list before proceeding with the election. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Voters' List - Inclusion of Gram-Panchayat Members - Section 11(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development & Regulation) Act, 1963 - The court considered whether the election process of APMC could proceed without including the names of members/Sarpanch of Gram-Panchayats in the voters' list. Held that the authorities have a mandatory duty to include such names, and failure to do so renders the election process illegal. (Paras 1-10)
B) Election Law - Election Process - Setting Aside - Section 11(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development & Regulation) Act, 1963 - The court set aside the election process of APMC Tumsar, directing the authorities to include the names of members/Sarpanch of 58 Gram-Panchayats in the voters' list before proceeding with the election. (Paras 11-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the election process of respondent No.6-APMC can be conducted without including the names of members/Sarpanch of 58 Gram-Panchayats from Mohadi Tahsil in the voters' list, and whether such omission is illegal and bad in law.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the election process of respondent No.6-APMC, Tumsar, and directed the respondents to include the names of the members/Sarpanch of the 58 Gram-Panchayats from Mohadi Tahsil in the voters' list before proceeding with the election. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Election law
- Cooperative societies
- Voters' list
- Gram-Panchayat members
- APMC Act
- Section 11(1)(b)
- Inclusion of names
- Mandatory duty
- Election process
- Setting aside
Case Details
2024 LawText (BOM) (02) 269
WRIT PETITION NO. 2105 OF 2023
NITIN W. SAMBRE, ABHAY J. MANTRI
Mr. Harish Dangre, Mr. N.R. Patil, Mr. S.S. Ghate, Mr. J.B. Kasat, Mr. S.S. Paliwal
Mr. Sadashiv s/o Shivaji Dhenge
The State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Department of Cooperation, Marketing & Textile; The State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Rural Development Department; The State Cooperative Election Authority, Maharashtra State; The State Election Commission, Maharashtra State; District Returning Officer (APMC) And District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Bhandara; Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC), Tumsar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the election process of APMC Tumsar for not including names of Gram-Panchayat members in voters' list.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the election process and direct inclusion of names of members/Sarpanch of 58 Gram-Panchayats in the voters' list.
Filing Reason
The election process of APMC Tumsar was being conducted without including the names of members/Sarpanch of 58 Gram-Panchayats from Mohadi Tahsil in the voters' list, which is mandatory under Section 11(1)(b) of the APMC Act.
Issues
Whether the election process of APMC can be conducted without including the names of Gram-Panchayat members in the voters' list as required under Section 11(1)(b) of the APMC Act.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the authorities have a mandatory duty to include names of members/Sarpanch of Gram-Panchayats in the voters' list before conducting the election.
Respondents argued that the election process was being conducted in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 11(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development & Regulation) Act, 1963, the authorities have a mandatory duty to include the names of members/Sarpanch of Gram-Panchayats in the voters' list for APMC elections. Failure to do so renders the election process illegal and liable to be set aside.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner has raised the grievance that holding of election to elect the members of respondent No.6-Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Tumsar before completion of the election process of 58 Gram-Panchayats from Mohadi Tahsil without inclusion of the names of members/Sarpanch from these 58 Gram-Panchayats in the voters’ list, is illegal and bad in law.
Under Section 11(1)(b) of the APMC Act, the authorities have a mandatory duty to include the names of members/Sarpanch of Gram-Panchayats in the voters' list.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 2105 of 2023 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, challenging the election process of APMC Tumsar. The petition was heard on November 30, 2023, and judgment was pronounced on February 8, 2024.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development & Regulation) Act, 1963: Section 11(1)(b)
