Gujarat High Court
Dilip Mesur Gojiya & 149 vs Chavda Ramdebhai Hamirbhai & 5 on 18 March, 2016
Author: Akil Kureshi
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Z.K.Saiyed
C/LPA/201/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 201 of 2016
In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3938 of 2016
With
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2498 of 2016
In
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 201 of 2016
==========================================================
DILIP MESUR GOJIYA & 149....Appellant(s)
Versus
CHAVDA RAMDEBHAI HAMIRBHAI & 5....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DIPEN DESAI, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 - 150
MR.PRAKASH K. JANI, LD. ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL for the
Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date : 18/03/2016
COMMON ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
1. The appellants are original respondents No.6 to 155 in the Writ Petition which was filed by the opponent No.1 herein. The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition by impugned judgment dated 16.03.2016 and quashed an order dated 05.03.2016 passed by the Authorized Officer. Consequently, the inclusion of the names of the present appellants in the voters' list for the traders constituency for the election to the Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Page 1 of 5 HC-NIC Page 1 of 5 Created On Sat Mar 19 02:47:21 IST 2016 C/LPA/201/2016 ORDER Bhatiya is set aside. The central controversy revolves around interpretation of Section 11(1) of Gujarat Agriculture Produce Markets Act as amended by the Amendment Act of 2015.
2. In Section 11(1)(ii) of the Act in order to be eligible to be a voter, the trader should be holding general license and have traded in full conformity with the terms and conditions of the license in the previous financial year and pay the fees payable by him. According to the petitioner since the present appellants were granted licenses for trading only in the month of June, 2015, they do not fulfill this requirement of having traded in the previous financial year. This contention was upheld by the learned Single Judge.
3. Learned counsel Mr.Dipen Desai for the appellants submitted that once the election programme was declared and election machinery was put in motion, the learned Single Judge should not have interfered in the preparation of voters' list. He further submitted that even the interpretation adopted by the learned Single Judge is not correct. Statute as amended no Page 2 of 5 HC-NIC Page 2 of 5 Created On Sat Mar 19 02:47:21 IST 2016 C/LPA/201/2016 ORDER where requires that the trading activities should have carried on during the entire or even the part of the period falling in the financial year prior to the year in which the election is being conducted. He pointed out that as per the election programme the voting would take place on 21.03.2016.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel Shri Satyam Chhaya for the original petitioner (opponent No.1 herein) vehemently opposed the appeal contending that the learned Single Judge has given a correct interpretation. The appellants had not even been granted trading license in the financial year previous to the year when the election is being conducted. They therefore do not fulfill an essential requirement for being included in the voters' list. The Authorized Officer had failed to examine these important aspects of the matter while overruling the objections of the petitioner against the inclusion of the names of the petitioners in the voters' list in the traders constituency.
5. We also heard learned Additional Advocate General for the State.
Page 3 of 5 HC-NIC Page 3 of 5 Created On Sat Mar 19 02:47:21 IST 2016 C/LPA/201/2016 ORDER
6. The appeal presents important question of limitation of exercising writ jurisdiction in election matters, as also the true interpretation of amended Section 11(1) of Gujarat Agriculture Produce Markets Act. The available time being short, these issues cannot be thrashed out at this stage without full consideration.
7. Under the circumstances, let there be notice, returnable on 01.04.2016. By way of interim formula, we allow all the appellants to vote in the ensuing elections for the APMC, Bhatiya. However, their votes shall be kept in separate sealed cover. The remaining votes should be kept separately. Results of the election for the traders constituency shall not be declared without the leave of the Court. It is clarified that nothing stated in this order shall enable any of the appellants to contest in traders constituency. Direct service today is permitted.
(AKIL KURESHI, J.) Page 4 of 5 HC-NIC Page 4 of 5 Created On Sat Mar 19 02:47:21 IST 2016 C/LPA/201/2016 ORDER (Z.K.SAIYED, J.) ANKIT Page 5 of 5 HC-NIC Page 5 of 5 Created On Sat Mar 19 02:47:21 IST 2016