Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Sheshrao Thakre, Chairman of the Agriculture Produce Market Committee (APMC), Katol, challenged a notice dated 02.12.2013 issued by the Collector, Nagpur (respondent no.1) convening a special meeting of the Market Committee on 12.12.2013 to consider a no-confidence motion against him. The petitioner contended that the notice did not comply with the mandatory requirement of 15 clear days' notice under Rule 14(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967, read with Section 14 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963. The respondents argued that the notice period was sufficient and that the motion was valid. The court examined the statutory provisions and found that the notice was issued on 02.12.2013 for a meeting on 12.12.2013, which provided only 10 days, not 15 clear days. The court held that the requirement of 15 clear days' notice is mandatory and must be strictly complied with. The notice was quashed and set aside, and the respondents were directed not to proceed with the meeting scheduled for 12.12.2013. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Statutory Interpretation - Mandatory Notice Period - No-Confidence Motion - Section 14 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963 read with Rule 14(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967 - The requirement of 15 clear days' notice for a special meeting to consider a no-confidence motion is mandatory and must be strictly complied with. The notice dated 02.12.2013 calling the meeting on 12.12.2013 provided only 10 days, not 15 clear days, and was therefore invalid. Held that the notice is quashed and set aside (Paras 4-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the notice dated 02.12.2013 calling a special meeting on 12.12.2013 to consider a no-confidence motion against the Chairman of the Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Katol, complied with the mandatory requirement of 15 clear days' notice under Rule 14(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The notice dated 02.12.2013 issued by respondent no.1 convening a special meeting of respondent no.16 Market Committee on 12.12.2013 to consider the no-confidence motion against the petitioner is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed not to proceed with the meeting scheduled for 12.12.2013. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Mandatory notice period
- 15 clear days
- no-confidence motion
- statutory interpretation
- strict compliance
- rule 14(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules
- 1967
- section 14 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act
- 1963
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (12) 127
Writ Petition No. 6532/2013
B.P. Dharmadhikari, A.S. Chandurkar
Mr. M.G. Bhangde, Senior Advocate with Shri M.P. Khajanchi and Shri M.I. Dhatrak, Advocates for Petitioner; Mr. A.S. Fulzele, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for Respondent Nos.1 and 2; Mr. H.D. Dangre, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 to 15; Mr. R. Dhore, Advocate for Respondent no.16
Dinesh s/o Sheshrao Thakre
The Collector, Nagpur; The Sub Divisional Officer as well as Presiding Officer of Special Meeting of No confidence Motion of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Katol; Vinayakrao Ramraoji Mankar; Angadji s/o Madhodeo Bhaiswar; Manik s/o Mahadeorao Lande; Sou. Vandanatai w/o Subhash Tekade; Bandu s/o Dnyaneshwar Rathod; Bhushan s/o Panjabrao Sawarkar; Ajay s/o Vijay Ladse; Ganesh s/o Mohanlal Kela; Gajananrao Mahadeorao Khodankar; Anil s/o Gangadhar Dhomne; Nagorao s/o Mahadeorao Hingwe; Tarkeshwar s/o Mahadeorao Shelke; Dinesh s/o Namdeorao Nikose; The Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Katol, through its Secretary
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging a notice convening a special meeting to consider a no-confidence motion against the Chairman of the Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Katol.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the notice dated 02.12.2013 and direction to the respondents not to proceed with the meeting scheduled for 12.12.2013.
Filing Reason
The notice did not comply with the mandatory requirement of 15 clear days' notice under Rule 14(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967.
Issues
Whether the notice dated 02.12.2013 calling a special meeting on 12.12.2013 to consider a no-confidence motion against the Chairman of the Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Katol, complied with the mandatory requirement of 15 clear days' notice under Rule 14(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the notice dated 02.12.2013 for a meeting on 12.12.2013 provided only 10 days, not 15 clear days, and thus violated Rule 14(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967.
Respondents argued that the notice period was sufficient and that the motion was valid.
Ratio Decidendi
The requirement of 15 clear days' notice under Rule 14(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967, for convening a special meeting to consider a no-confidence motion is mandatory and must be strictly complied with. A notice that does not provide 15 clear days is invalid and cannot be acted upon.
Judgment Excerpts
The notice dated 02.12.2013 calling the meeting on 12.12.2013 provides only 10 days and not 15 clear days as required by Rule 14(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967.
The requirement of 15 clear days' notice is mandatory and must be strictly complied with.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 6532/2013 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the notice dated 02.12.2013. The court heard the matter on 12.12.2013 and delivered an oral judgment allowing the petition.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963: Section 14
- Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967: Rule 14(2)
