Case Note & Summary
The Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Udgir, through its Chairman, filed a writ petition challenging the appointment of respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 as Junior Clerks on its establishment by the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Latur. The respondents had been serving as Junior Clerks on the Committee's establishment. The Committee argued that the appointments were not valid. The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad, after hearing the parties, held that the appointments were made by the competent authority under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963. The Court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it, directing the Committee to implement the appointments. The judgment was delivered by Justice V.R. Kingaonkar on 6th January 2010.
Headnote
A) Agricultural Law - Appointment of Employees - Section 27 of Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963 - The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies appointed respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 as Junior Clerks on the establishment of the petitioner Market Committee. The Committee challenged the appointments. The Court held that the appointments were made by the competent authority under Section 27 of the Act and the Committee is bound to implement them. The petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Agricultural Produce Market Committee is bound to implement the appointment of Junior Clerks made by the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the appointments of respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 as Junior Clerks were made by the competent authority under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963, and the petitioner Market Committee is bound to implement them.
Law Points
- Appointment of employees by Registrar under Section 27 of Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act
- 1963 is valid and binding on Market Committee
- Market Committee cannot refuse to implement such appointments
- Writ petition dismissed for lack of merit.
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 388
Writ Petition No. 4880 of 2008
Mr. A.N. Irpatgire for petitioners, Mr. N.H. Borade, AGP for respondent No. 1, Mr. M.B. Kolpe holding for Mr. U.L. Manale for respondent No. 2
The Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Udgir, through its Chairman, Govindrao s/o Arjunrao Biradar, and The Secretary, The Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Udgir
The Dy. District Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Latur; Chandrakant s/o Virshettiappa Bavge; Shri Pandit s/o Kondiba Somuse; Shri Baburao s/o Pandharinath Natkar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging appointment of Junior Clerks by Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies on the establishment of the petitioner Market Committee.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to quash the appointment of respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 as Junior Clerks.
Filing Reason
Petitioners contended that the appointments made by the Deputy Registrar were not valid and the Committee was not bound to implement them.
Issues
Whether the Agricultural Produce Market Committee is bound to implement the appointment of Junior Clerks made by the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the appointments were not valid and the Committee should not be compelled to implement them.
Respondents argued that the appointments were made by the competent authority under Section 27 of the Act and the Committee is bound to implement them.
Ratio Decidendi
The appointments made by the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963 are valid and binding on the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, and the Committee cannot refuse to implement such appointments.
Judgment Excerpts
Admittedly, the respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 were serving as Junior Clerk on Establishment of the petitioner – Agricultural Produce Market Committee.
The appointments of respondents No. 2, 3 and 4 as Junior Clerks were made by the competent authority under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963 and the petitioner is bound to implement the same.
Procedural History
The writ petition was filed in 2008. It was taken up for final hearing on 6th January 2010 and disposed of at the peremptory stage by consent.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963: Section 27
