Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, voters of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Tal. Shirur, Dist. Pune, challenged the order dated 1st August 2016 passed by the State of Maharashtra extending the term of office of the members of the Committee by six months from 6th September 2016 to 5th March 2017. The Committee had submitted an application seeking extension of term by two years citing severe drought, a pending dispute regarding village Pimpale Jagtap in the Bombay High Court, efficient performance of duties, initiation of onion and pomegranate markets, and ongoing elections of cooperative societies. The State Government considered the application and granted extension for six months. The petitioners argued that the extension was without any valid reason and contrary to the provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963. The Court examined Section 14(5) of the Act, which empowers the State Government to extend the term of a market committee for reasons to be recorded in writing. The Court found that the reasons cited by the Committee and accepted by the State were not germane to the purpose of the Act. Drought and pending litigation were not relevant to the functioning of the market committee. The Court held that the power to extend term is not arbitrary and must be exercised only for valid reasons. The extension order was quashed and set aside. The Court directed that elections be held expeditiously.
Headnote
A) Agricultural Law - Extension of Term of Market Committee - Section 14(5) of Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963 - Power to Extend Term - The State Government extended the term of the members of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee by six months on the ground of drought and pending litigation. The Court held that the reasons given were not germane to the purpose of the Act and the extension was not justified. The power under Section 14(5) must be exercised for reasons recorded in writing and such reasons must be relevant to the functioning of the market committee. (Paras 4-6) B) Agricultural Law - Voters' Rights - Extension of Term Without Hearing - The petitioners, being voters of the market committee, challenged the extension order. The Court held that the extension of term without considering the objections of the voters and without any valid reason was arbitrary and violative of the democratic process. (Paras 2-3) C) Agricultural Law - Grounds for Extension - Drought and Pending Litigation - The State Government cited drought and a pending dispute regarding village Pimpale Jagtap as grounds for extension. The Court found that these grounds were not sufficient to justify extension of the term of the committee, as they did not relate to the functioning or administration of the market committee. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State Government's order extending the term of office of the members of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee by six months under Section 14(5) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963 is valid and sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 1st August 2016 passed by the State Government extending the term of the members of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Tal. Shirur, Dist. Pune is quashed and set aside. The State Government is directed to hold elections for the Committee expeditiously.
Law Points
- Extension of term of market committee must be for reasons recorded in writing
- reasons must be germane to the purpose of the Act
- power under Section 14(5) is not arbitrary
- drought and pending litigation are not valid grounds for extension
- extension cannot be granted solely on request of committee without considering voters' interests
