Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 12, Cited by 2]

Gujarat High Court

Amratbhai Lilabhai Desai & 6 vs State Of Gujarat & 2 on 25 September, 2017

Author: S.G. Shah

Bench: S.G. Shah

               C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                         SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16003 of 2017

         ================================================================

AMRATBHAI LILABHAI DESAI  &  6....Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT  &  2....Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance:

MR VC VAGHELA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 ­ 7 ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO GP/PP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR PK JANI, AAG with MS MANISHA L. SHAH, GP with Mr.Niraj Ashar, AGP for  the Respondent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.G. SHAH Date : 25/09/2017 CAV ORDER
1. Heard   learned   advocate   Mr.V.C.   Vaghela   for  the petitioners, learned Additional Advocate  General   Mr.   P.   K.   Jani   with   learned  Government   Pleader   Ms.Manisha   L.   Shah  assisted   by Mr.Niraj   Ashar,  learned  AGP  for  the  respondent  -  State  and  learned  advocate  Mr.Dipen   Desai   for   private   respondent   Nos.4  to 11 who appeared as caveator. Perused the  record. 
2. The   petitioner   herein   are   Chairman,   Vice  Chairman   and   few   Members   of   the   Siddhpur  Agriculture   Produce   Market   Committee   (For  Page 1 of 39 HC-NIC Page 1 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER Short   `SAPMC')   whereas   respondent   No.1   is  State and respondent No.2 is Director of the  concerned department being Agriculture Market  and Rural Finance, respondent No.3 is Inquiry  Officer and Joint Registrar (Commerce) of the  Cooperative   Societies   Department,   whereas,  private respondent Nos.4 to 11 are concerned  with   the   affairs   of   SAPMC.   The   petitioners  have challenged the order dated 19.8.2017 by  respondent   No.1   whereby   as   provided   under  Section   46   of   the   Gujarat   Cooperative  Societies   Act   (For   short   `Act')   superseded  the   elected   body   of   SAPMC   and   appointed  District   Registrar   and   Deputy   Director   of  Cooperative Societies, Patan as Administrator  of   SAPMC.   Therefore,   it   is   alleged   by   the  petitioners   that   there   is   clear   and   prima  facie  case  in  their  favour  when  respondents  have   superseded   the   elected   body   contending  that this is nothing but a bias and political  decision to take revenge against the success  of   rival   political   party,   when   party   in  government could not win the election, which  is only because of non support of public and  voters to the party in power in government. 

Therefore,   because   of   their   power   in  government, the defeated party had passed the  impugned   order.   Though   such   reasons   and  ground may look and seems to be attractive,  Page 2 of 39 HC-NIC Page 2 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER the   Court   has   to   decide   the   issue   after  considering   rival   submissions.   For   the  purpose,   entire   facts   and   rival   submissions  need to be scrutinized.

3. It   is   undisputed   fact   that   petitioners   and  private   respondents   are   agriculturist   and  petitioners   are   elected   members   of   Managing  Committee  of  Defendant  in  the  election  held  in   the   year   2015,   whereby,   petitioner   No.1  was   elected   as   Chairman   and   No.2   as   Vice  Chairman.   A   dispute   regarding   financial   and  voters   list   is   ongoing   and   it   is   pending  before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. It  is contended by the petitioner that meanwhile  on   4.10.2016,   8   persons   have   filed   an  application   before   the   Competent   Authority  alleging that present committee of Defendant  has   committed   persistent   default   and,  therefore,   requested   the   authorities   to  initiate inquiry under Section 44 of the Act.  It is alleged that the Inquiry Officer has,  under political dictate, without hearing the  petitioners   submitted   his   report   dated  4.2.2017 holding that petitioners are guilty.  Therefore, a show cause notice under Section  46 of the Act was issued to the petitioners  on 23.2.2017 calling upon the petitioners to  explain   that   why   the   committee   of   SAPMC   be  Page 3 of 39 HC-NIC Page 3 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER not   superseded   for   the   allegations   levelled  in   such   show   cause   notice.   Thereupon,  petitioners   have   filed   Special   Civil  Application   Nos.5307   and   5308   of   2017  challenging the inquiry report dated 4.2.2017  under Section 44 and show cause notice dated  3.2.2017   under   Section   46   of   the   Act.   Both  such petitions were disposed of by this Court  by   order   dated   10.2.2017   with   some  directions.  It  is  further  submitted  that   in  compliance of such directions petitioners had  appeared   before   the   Authority   on   15.3.2017  and requested the respondent No.1 to provide  all   documents   on   which   the   inquiry   officer  has relied while confirming the report under  Section 44 of the Act. 

4. It   is   further   submitted   that   no   documents  were provided thereafter till 20.5.2017 when  petitioner   has   again   submitted   one  application   disclosing   factual   details   and  claiming that they could not respond to show  cause notice in absence of such documents. On  2.6.2017,   respondent   No.2   has   provided   some  documents   enabling   the   petitioner   No.1   to  file   a reply   before  the  competent  authority  on   5.6.2017.   It   is   also   contended   that  petitioner   Nos.2   to   6   have   requested   for  extending   an   opportunity   to   hear   them   on  Page 4 of 39 HC-NIC Page 4 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER 2.6.2017   so   also   on   5.6.2017.   Thereupon,  respondent   No.2   had   issued   notice   to   the  petitioner   Nos.2   to   6   to   submit   their  statement on 23.6.2017. The petitioners have  submitted  their  reply  on  4.8.2017  and  asked  for further time to make oral submissions but  respondents   have,   instead   of   granting   time  for   making   oral   submissions   passed   the  impugned   order   on   19.8.2017   and,   therefore,  petitioners   have   sought   indulgence   of   this  Court   for   appropriate   Writ   or   direction   to  quash   and   set   aside   such   order   dated  19.8.2017   as   being   illegal,   arbitrary   and  against the principle of natural justice with  interim   relief   to   stay   the   operation   and  implementation of such order dated 19.8.2017.

5. Based upon above referred factual details, it  is   submitted   by   the   petitioners   that   the  action   of   the   respondent   authorities   are  absolutely   malafide   and   arbitrary   and   that  allegations   against   the   present   petitioners  are for such cause which were not decided by  the   present   committee   but   decision   of   the  previous committee and present committee has  merely   executed   the   order   of   previous  committee and, therefore, they cannot be held  liable   or   responsible.   In   addition   to   one  such ground, in fact there are in all several  Page 5 of 39 HC-NIC Page 5 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER irregularities   for   which   impugned   order   is  passed. Therefore, petitioners have tried to  emphasize  that  they  are  not  responsible  for  any such misconduct and, therefore, impugned  order super­ceding or suspending the elected  body is illegal and needs to be quashed. In  addition to factual details which are termed  as   irregularities   by   the   respondents,   the  petitioners   have   contended   that   pursuant   to  direction   by   this   Court   vide   judgment   and  order   dated   10.3.2017   in   Special   Civil  Application   Nos.5307   and   5308   of   2017   that  respondents   have   not   followed   the   direction  while challenging the impugned order of this  Court   and   failed   to   comply   with   the  provisions of Sections 44 and 45 of the Act. 

6. As against that, the respondent - State has  come forward with a specific allegations that  there   are   several   material   irregularities  committed by the Executing Committee of SAPMC  whereby they have not only safeguarded their  own  interest   but  acted  against  the  interest  of   all   the   members   of   the   SAPMC   and,  therefore,   considering   the   seriousness   and  graveness   of   the   allegations   against   the  SAPMC,   they   have   no   option   but   to   initiate  appropriate   proceedings   against   the  petitioners   and   during   such   proceedings   a  Page 6 of 39 HC-NIC Page 6 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER competent authorities has taken a decision to  supersede   the   petitioners   -   committee   and,  therefore,   when   there   is   clear   evidence  available   to   confirm   the   misdeeds   by   the  petitioners, then, respondents have no option  but to pass impugned order.

7. In   addition   to   factual   details   narrated  hereinabove,   the   petitioners   have   contended  that   provision   of   law   does   not   permit   the  petitioner  to  pass  the  impugned  order,  more  particularly,   when   documents   called   for   by  the   petitioners   are   not   provided   by   the  respondents.

8. Whereas,   respondents   have   relied   upon   the  factual   details   regarding   misdeeds   of   the  petitioners from the report of inquiry which  is part of the record.

9. In view of such rival submissions, we have to  first   verify   the   details   of   different  misdeeds and to determine that those misdeeds  are sufficient for passing impugned order so  as to supersede the elected committee and to  appoint an Administrator for SAPMC.

10. There  are  several  irregularities   but  in all  seven   main   irregularities   considered   by   the  Page 7 of 39 HC-NIC Page 7 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER respondents   while   super­ceding   the   SAPMC.  They are as under: ­

1. Though   the   provision   of   law  and government circulars are very much  clear   to   confirm   that   management   of  APMC   should   be   done   so   as   not   to  increase   the   total   expenditure   above  40%   of   budgetary   provision   of   the  APMC, the petitioners have spend more  than required fund only by paying the  arrears under the pretext of revision  pay   scale   to   its   staff.   All   such  details   are   discussed   in   detail   in  report   dated   4.2.2017   by   the   Joint  Registrar   (Commercial);   copy   of   which  is   produced   at   Annexure   `D.'   The  report   shows   that   without   considering  the   factual   details   and   applicability  of   particular   pay   scale,   the  petitioners   have   increased   the   salary  of several employees and released the  arrears   and,   thereby,   utilized   huge  fund of the SAPMC. The report further  confirms that while paying the arrears  unnecessary   more   amount   is   paid   to  some of the employees and, therefore,  it   was   ordered   to   be   recovered   from  them. For arriving at such conclusion,  Page 8 of 39 HC-NIC Page 8 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER the   Joint   Registrar   has   relied   upon  the   Audit   Report.   Therefore,   when  Auditor has said that the petitioners  have   travelled   beyond   the   Rules   for  making   payment   to   its   employees   the  Joint   Registrar   has   no   option   but   to  rely upon Audit Report. 

As   against   that,   only   defence   by   the  petitioners are to the effect that the  decision to increase the pay scale was  taken   by   previous   committee   and   they  have   simply   implemented   it.   Such  pretext   cannot   be   accepted   for   the  simple   reason   that   even   if   previous  committee   has   taken   a   decision   while  executing   such   decision   existing  committee   shall   certainly   verify   the  propitiatory   and   implication   of   any  such decision, more particularly, when  it   involves   financial   liability.  However,   this   is   not   the   sole  irregularity and, therefore, it cannot  be said that such irregularity is not  sufficient   to   take   steps   under   the  Statute. 

2.    In   addition   to   general  revision   of   pay   scale   and   payment   of  Page 9 of 39 HC-NIC Page 9 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER arrears at once which increased a huge  financial   liability   as   discussed   in  previous   paragraph,   the   retiring  Secretary   of   SAPMC   namely;   Manubhai  Patel   was   paid   10%   charge   allowance  from the year 2002 till 2013 though he  was   getting   the   same   salary   of  Secretary   as   an   In­charge   Secretary.  Thus,   when   a   person   is   placed   in  charge   of   any   particular   post   he   is  entitled   to   charge   allowance   only   if  he is drawing salary of his cadre but  if he was awarded the salary of higher  cadre   charge   of   which   is   handled   by  him then, there would be no payment of  charge   allowance.   Therefore,   such  payment   is   illegal   and   thus  petitioners   have   committed  irregularity in making huge payment to  its   Secretary.   Therefore,   Joint  Registrar   has   to   decide   for   recovery  of such excess payment as it is due to  irregularity   at   the   end   of   the  petitioners. 

3. Similarly,   all   the   staff   of  the   SAPMC   had   been   given   revised   pay  scale   and   in   all   Rs.22,00,000/­  (Rupees   twenty   two   lacs   only)   were  Page 10 of 39 HC-NIC Page 10 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER paid   to   the   staff   towards   arrears,  whereby,   total   expenditure   of   the  SAPMC   has   crossed   the   limit   of   40%  since   total   cost   has   gone   upto   48%  only   for   such   administration   purposes  and,   thereby,   by   making   huge   payment  to   all   staff   and   some   irregular  payment to some of the staff for their  benefit, petitioners have not bothered  to   spend   such   amount   for   the   benefit  of   the   Members   of   the   APMC   who   are  agriculturist   and   for   whose   benefit  all such APMCs are formed. 

4. Similarly,  some  staff  members  were   paid   cash   amount   against   leave  encashment   against   the   provisions   of  law,   inasmuch   as,   employees   are  entitled   to   en­cash   only   15   days  Earned Leave in two years and not more  than   that.   However,   none   bothered   to  verify all such facts. It also results  into   irregularity   whereby   there   is  financial loss to the APMC.

5. In   constructing   water   tank,  way bridge and paver block also, there  was clarity that APMC has carried out  only   small   work   for   benefit   of   its  Page 11 of 39 HC-NIC Page 11 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER Members   being   agriculturist   and  majority   amount   has   been   spent   in  making   payment   to   the   staff   and  contractors   to   some   other   work   than  betterment of members.

6. There   was   irregular  appointment of daily wager and ad­hoc  employees. Though it is contended that  there   was   no   such   appointment,   the  fact   remains   that   even   if   such  appointment   on   daily   basis   or   ad­hoc  appointment   was   for   limited   purpose,  it amounts to irregularity. 

7. There   was   irregularity   in  recruitment   process   also   whereby  instead   of   publishing   notice   for  recruitment in a well known newspaper  like Divya Bhaskar, Sandesh or Gujarat  Samachar, it was published in a local  newspaper namely; Nibhav Dainik so as  to appoint the person of their choice.  Though   it   is   contended   by   the  petitioners that pursuant to objection  by   the   respondent,   they   have   not  completed   such   recruitment   process,  the fact remains that petitioners have  attempted   to   appoint   the   person   of  Page 12 of 39 HC-NIC Page 12 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER their   choice   and   the   recruitment  process   certainly   proves   material  irregularity   and   illegality.  Therefore, when recruitment notice was  not published properly that itself is  a proof of material irregularity. 

8. Even  appointment  of Secretary  was   not   in   accordance   with   law   and  Rules   are   being   ignored   while  selecting   the   Secretary   of   SAPMC   and  than he was paid huge amount though he  is not entitled to it. 

9. While   dealing   with   the  properties of the SAPMC, care has not  been taken to protect the right of the  APMC over the property and some of the  properties   were   allotted   to   the   near  and   dear   of   the   Chairman   and   Vice  Chairman.   Therefore,   even   if   such  dispute   was   resolved   after   some  litigation and may not be in force on  the   date   of   the   impugned   order,   it  certainly   amounts   to   irregularity  because   even   for   safeguarding   the  right over the property of APMC, APMC  has to spend huge amount. 




                                                            Page 13 of 39

HC-NIC                                                   Page 13 of 39            Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017
          C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER



10. Though Civil Suits were filed  before the Patan Court to recover the  huge amount of the APMC from concerned  defendant including few members of the  APMC, when such suit was dismissed for  want   of   prosecution,   the   petitioners  have instead of filing appeal in time  though     conveyed   by   the   Registrar   to  do   so,   failed   to   take   action   in   time  and, thereby, frustrated the rights of  the   APMC   in   recovering   huge   amount  from   the   wrong   doors.   This   is   also  done because such suit is against one  of   the   present   petitioner   and,  therefore, if that suit is decreed, he  has to deposit huge amount of APMC and  hence   to   safeguard   their   own   skin,  they have agreed to commit loss to the  tune   of   Rs.52,00,000/­   (Rupees   Fifty  Two   Lacs   Only)   to   the   APMC.   It   is  submitted   by   the   respondents   that  therefore   the   Administrator   has   to  prefer   an   appeal   with   an   application  to   condone   the   delay   in   filing   such  appeal   before   the   High   Court.   The  relevant documents to that effect are  referred by the learned AAP which are  taken   on   record.   Those   documents  simply confirm the factual details and  Page 14 of 39 HC-NIC Page 14 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER filing of appeal before the High Court  but it results into confirmation that  there   was   non­action   on   the   part   of  the   petitioners   in   safeguarding   the  rights of the APMC which can certainly  be termed as irregularity. 

11. There is also irregularity in  utilization   of   official   vehicle   of  APMC   by   its   Office   Bearers   when   one  car had run more than 72000 kilometers  in   a   year   without   disclosing   the  purpose   in   the   log   book   and   it   was  clear   that   it   has   been   used   for  travelling   for   pilgrimage   purpose   and  also   used   for   the   either   attending  litigation   or   for   the   concerned  advocate   of   the   APMC   and   on   every  alternate   date,   vehicle   had   travelled  from   Siddhpur,   Ahmedabad,   Gandhinagar  or   Patan   without   disclosing   the  purpose   for   such   travelling.   Details  of such travelling was also disclosed  in   such   report   and   expenditure   of  diesel   and   other   cost   is   shown   as  Rs.1,51,000/­   (Rupees   One   Lac   Fifty  One Thousand Only). This clearly shows  that   there   is   material   financial  irregularity in managing the APMC. 


                                                            Page 15 of 39

HC-NIC                                                   Page 15 of 39            Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017
          C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER




                    12.                       The   total   expenditure   of 

salary   and   administration   has   crossed  40% which is against the Rules.

13. There   is   irregularity   in  dealing   with   the   applications   for  licence   and   its   renewal   so   also  increasing   litigation   expenditure  unnecessarily. 

14. Considering   the   pendency   of  litigation   regarding   result   of  Election   before   the   Hon'ble   Supreme  Court   of   India,   though   the   Elected  Committee may not be entitled to take  policy   decision,   several   policy  decisions were taken. 

15. Again   there   is   dispute  regarding   the   issuance   of   licence   in  name   of   different   Cooperative  Societies. 

16. One   another   dispute   is   also  regarding   irregularities   with   licence  at the time of Election.

17. There is huge expenditure for  Page 16 of 39 HC-NIC Page 16 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER sumputary   /   complimentary   allowance.  Factually it is disclosed that in the  year 2015­16 such expenditure was less  than   Rs.4,00,000/­   for   hospitality  allowance,   whereas,   miscellaneous  expenditure   was   more   than  Rs.4,00,000/­   as   against   expenditure  for   the   development   of   agricultural  was   less   than   Rs.4,00,000/­.   Thereby,  the   unwarranted   expenditure   was   more  than Rs.7,00,000/­ against expenditure  for   the   purpose   of   agriculturist   was  less   than   Rs.4,00,000/­.   However,   in  the year 2016­17, the expenditure for  hospitality   allowance   was   about   1.64  lacs whereas miscellaneous expenditure  was   Rs.1.9   lacs   against   the  expenditure   for   development   of  agricultural   being   Rs.1.64   lacs.  Thereby,   against   the   unwarranted  expenditure   of   approximately   3.64  lacs, the expenditure for real purpose  was   only   Rs.1.64   lacs.   Thereby,   more  money   has   been   spent   for   unwarranted  expenditure   and   so   far   as   balance  sheet is concerned against the income  of   Rs.2,83,51,793/­,   the   expenditure  which should not be more than 40% was  Rs.2,45,09,838/­   i.e.   more   than   95%. 


                                                            Page 17 of 39

HC-NIC                                                   Page 17 of 39            Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017
              C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER



Therefore,   it   certainly   amounts   to  material   irregularity   amongst   which  only   administration   expenditure   is  more than 48%. 

18.   Against   the   rule,   the  licence was issued for the trading of  fruit and vegetables and thereby there  was   irregularity   in   allotting   few  shops and creating undue imbalance and  selectiveness   in   Election   proceedings  because   of   licence   to   unwarranted  traders.

 

11. Amongst   all   such   eighteen   irregularities,  when   petitioners   have   submitted   that   no  further   action   is   required   for   all   such  irregularities, even thereafter, so far as 7  irregularities   are   concerned,   it   cannot   be  rectified or pardoned and, therefore, during  hearing   only   those   seven   irregularities   are  highlighted.   However,   in   any   case,   even   if  few   irregularities,   out   of   total   18  irregularities   are   proved   and   could   not   be  rectified then it would certainly amounts to  material   irregularities   empowering   the  competent authorities to initiate proceedings  against the petitioners.  




                                                                Page 18 of 39

HC-NIC                                                       Page 18 of 39            Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017
              C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER



12. Such seven irregularities for which impugned  order is passed is explained and taken care  in impugned order dated 19.8.2017 which are: 

(1)  Non­compliance   of   statutory  provisions of Act and Rules and non  compliance   of   all   directions   under  Sections 44 and 45 even if repeated  intimation,    (2) Irregularity in recruitment, (3) In not taking care of Civil  Suit   Nos.32   and   33   of   2004   and  getting   it   dismissed   for   want   of  prosecution   and,   thereafter,   in   not  preferring   an   appeal   within  limitation   though   intimated   to   do  so.
                        (4)                       Misuse of vehicle.


                        (5)                       Spending   more   than   40% 
income   of   the   APMC,   whereas   so   far  as   other   two   serious   issues   with  regard to  (6) granting   of   licences   to  Page 19 of 39 HC-NIC Page 19 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER several cooperative union and (7)  removing two Directors so as  to   create   majority   in   their   favour,  are   concerned,   it   is   stated   in  impugned order that since both these  issues   are   subjudice   though   it  amounts   to   material   irregularity   it  is not advisable to take decision on  such issue. 

However, in any case for the rest of  the   irregularities   which   are  material   in   question   the   competent  authorities   has   passed   impugned  order under Section 46 of the Act.  

13. Thereby, though factual details are very much  clear   to   show   that   there   are   material  irregularities for which competent authority  has   to   initiate   the   proceedings   as   per   the  law,   the   petitioners   have   emphasized   that  pursuant   to   judgment   and   order   dated  10.3.2017   in   Special   Civil   Application  Nos.5307   and   5308   of   2017,   the   respondent  shall   strictly   follow   the   provision   of  Sections   44   and   45   of   the   Act   before  proceedings further and that they have failed  to   do   so.   For   the   purpose,   it   would   be  Page 20 of 39 HC-NIC Page 20 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER appropriate to refer Sections 4445 and 46  of the Act, which reads as under: ­   44.      POWER TO HOLD INQUIRY  : ­ (1)  The Director may of his own motion,   himself or by an officer authorised by  him,   inspect   or   cause   to   be   inspected  the   accounts   of   a   market   committee   or  hold an inquiry in to the affairs of a  market committee.

(2)  When   the   affairs   of   a   market  committee   are   inquired   into,   all  members,   officers   and   servants   of   the  committee shall furnish such information  and   pro   duce   such   documents   in   their  possession,   relating   to   the   affairs   of  the   committee,   as   the   Director   or   the  officer may require.

(3)  The Director and the officer shall  have the power to summon and enforce the  attendance   of   members   and   officers   of  the market committee and to compel them  to   give   evidence   and   to   produce  documents by the same means and as far  as   possible   in   the   same   manner   as   is  provided in the case of a Civil Court by  the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

(4)  The   Director   or,   as   the   case   may  Page 21 of 39 HC-NIC Page 21 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER be, the officer may require the market  committee   either   as   a   result   of   the   inquiry or otherwise to do a thing or to  abstain   from   doing   a   thing   which   the  Director   or   the   officer   considers  necessary for the purposes of this Act,  and   to   send   a   written   reply   to   him  within   a   reasonable   time,   stating  whether   the   aforesaid   requisition   is  complied and in case it is not complied,  stating   its   reason   for   not   complying   with the requisition.

45.  POWER   OF   DIRECTOR   TO   PROVIDE   FOR   PERFORMANCE   OF   DUTIES   IN   DEFAULT   OF   MARKET COMMITTEE: ­ (1)  Where   the   Director   on   a   complaint   made   to   him   or   otherwise   is   satisfied  that a market committee has made default  in performing any duty imposed on it by   or under this Act, he may fix a period   for its due performance.

(2)  If the duty be not performed within   the   period   so   fixed,   the   Director   may  appoint a person to perform it, and may   direct that the expense of performing it  and the reasonable remuneration of such  person   shall   be   forthwith   paid   by   the  committee.





                                                            Page 22 of 39

HC-NIC                                                   Page 22 of 39            Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017
          C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER



(3)  If the expense and remuneration be  not   so   paid,   the   Director   may   make   an  order   directing   the   bank   in   which   any  moneys of the committee are deposited or  the   person   in   charge   of   any   place   of  security   in   which   the   moneys   of   the   committee   are   deposited   to   pay   such  expense   and   remuneration   from   moneys  standing to the credit of the committee  in   such   bank   or   in   the   hands   of   such  person or such moneys as may from time  to time be received from or on behalf of  the committee by way of deposit by such   bank or person; and such bank or person   shall be bound to obey such order. Every  payment   made   pursuant   to   such   order  shall   be   efficient   di   charge   for   such   bank or person from all liability to the  committee in respect of any sums so paid  by it or him.

46. SUPERSESSION OF MARKET COMMITTEE: ­ (1)  "If   in   the   opinion   of   the  State   Government   a   market   committee   is  not competent to perform or persistently  makes   default   in   performing   the   duties  imposed   on  it   by  or   under   this   Act   or   abuses its powers, the State Government  may,   by   notification   in   the   Official   Gazette, supersede such market committee  :Provided   that   before   issuing   a   Page 23 of 39 HC-NIC Page 23 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER notification under this sub­section, the  State Government shall give a reasonable  opportunity to the market committee for  showing   cause   why   it   should   not   be  superseded   and   shall   consider   the  explanation   and   objections,   if   any,   of  the market committee.

(2)  Upon   the   publication   of   a   notification   under   sub­section   (1)  superseding   a   market   committee   the   following   consequences   shall   ensue,  namely:­

(i)  all the members as well as  the   Chairman   and   Vice­Chairman   of  the market committee shall as from  the   date   of   such   publication   be  deemed   to   have   vacated   their  respective offices.

(ii)  The   State   Government   may  at   its   discretion,   either   order  that   a   new   market   committee   be   constituted   under   section   11   or  make such arrangements for carrying  out   the   functions   of   the   market  committee,   as   it   may   think   fit   ; 

                                 and


                                 (iii)                     all the assets vesting in 


                                                            Page 24 of 39

HC-NIC                                                   Page 24 of 39            Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017
          C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER



the market committee shall, subject  to all its liabilities, vest in the   State Government.

(3)  If   the   State   Government   makes  an   order   under   clause   (ii)   of   sub­ section   (2),   it   shall   transfer   the  assets   and   liabilities   of   the   market   committee   as   on   the   date   of   such  transfer,   to   the   new   market   committee  constituted under section 11 or to the  person or persons, if any, appointed for  carrying out the functions of the market  committee, as the case may be.

(4)  If   the   State   Government   does  not   make   such   an   order,   it   shall  transfer   all   the   assets   of   the   market   committee   which   remain   after   the  satisfaction of all its liabilities, to  the   State   Agricultural   Produce   Markets  Fund   constituted   under   section   34.   The  Director   shall   utilize   such   assets   for  such object in the area as he considers   to   be   for   the   benefit   of   the   agriculturists in that area."

Bare   reading   of   above   provision   makes   it  clear that though Section 44 and 45 are prior  Page 25 of 39 HC-NIC Page 25 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER to   Section   46   under   the   Chapter   VIII   and  thereby   though   it   is   to   be   followed   while  considering   the   jurisdiction   and   authority  under Section 46 by the competent authorities  and   though   there   is   specific   direction   in  order   dated   10.3.2017   in   Special   Civil  Application   No.5307   of   2017   and   allied  matters to follow the provisions of Sections  44   and   45   before   proceeding   further   under  provision   of   Section   46   it   cannot   be   said  that for passing any order under Section 46,  there   must   be   strict   compliance   of   order  under   Sections   44   and   45.   To   that   extent,  direction  in  order  dated   10.3.2017  needs   to  be  recollected  wherein  paragraph   5 reads   as  under: ­ "5.   However,   at   present   when  respondents   have   issued   show   cause  notice   under   Section   46   of   the  Agricultural   Produce   Market   Committee  Act, considering that against such show  cause notice, petitioners can certainly  represent   their   case   before   the  competent authority, it seems that, at   this   stage,   these   petitions   are  practically   pre­mature   and   do   not  required   to   be   entertained,   as   such   and, therefore, it has been disposed of  but with following directions;

(1) The   respondents   shall  consider   both   these   petitions   as  representation   and   reply   by   the  petitioners   to   the   show   cause  notice issued by them.

Page 26 of 39

HC-NIC Page 26 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER (2) Petitioners   may   also   file  fresh   and   separate   reply   in  detail, if they so desire.

(3) The competent authority shall  strictly   follow   the   provisions   of   Section   44   and   45   of   the   Agricultural   Produce   Market  Committee   Act   before   proceeding  further, in any manner whatsoever,   in   deciding   the   issue   which   is   raised   by   them   in   show   cause  notice dated 23.02.2017.

(4) Since   there   is   no   proper   compliance   of   Sub­Section   (4)   of  Section   44   and   45   of   the   Agricultural   Produce   Market  Committee   Act   by   the   respondents  before   issuing   show   cause   notice,   therefore,   if   at   all   decision   by  the competent authority is against   petitioners   then   in   that   case,  respondents   shall   not   execute   the   order   till   15   days   after   serving  it to the petitioners to represent  their case."

14. Therefore,   irrespective   of   above  observations,   this   Court   has   directed   the  respondent  to  first  follow  the  provision   of  Sections 44 and 45 before proceeding further  in the case of show cause notice issued under  Section 46. Therefore, in compliance of such  directions,   respondents   have   already   called  upon   the   petitioners   to   rectify   their  misdeeds and by letter dated 17.6.2017 called  upon the petitioners to remain present before  the   Registrar   of   Cooperative   Societies   on  Page 27 of 39 HC-NIC Page 27 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER 23.6.2017  to  submit  their  statement  as  well  as  written  or  oral  submissions  and  conveyed  that   to collect  all  relevant   documents  from  the   concerned   Offices   with   a   list   of   all  details of all eighteen irregularities which  are   discussed   hereinabove.   The   authorities  has also recorded a statement of Jashvantbhai  Prabhudasbhai   Patel   wherein   though   factual  details are explained, the fact remains that  there is no explanation so as to confirm that  there   was   no   irregularities   at   all   in   any  manner   whatsoever.   On   the   contrary,   the  statement   confirms   that   there   are   several  irregularities though it is tried to explain  that decision on all such irregularities were  taken   by   previous   committee   and   present  committee has simply executed it. But in any  case,   when   previous   committee   is   not   in  existence and thereby when present committee  in   In­charge   of   the   APM,   it   is   the   present  committee which has to be careful to see that  there is no irregularity and that even there  is   any   improper   decision   by   previous  committee   then   present   committee   shall   take  care   of   such   irregularity   by   not   executing  such   orders   or   decisions   which   are   either  irregular   on   day   one   or   results   into  irregularity on the date of its execution.




                                                            Page 28 of 39

HC-NIC                                                   Page 28 of 39            Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017
               C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER



15. So   far   as   compliance   of   provision   of   sub  Section   (4)   of   Section   45   as   referred   in  judgment   dated   10.3.2017   is   concerned,  suffice   to   say   that   there   is   prima   face  evidence   on   record   to   confirm   that  respondents   have   extended   a   reasonable  opportunity   to   the   petitioners   to   rectify  their   irregularities   when   by   letter   dated  30.5.2016 it was conveyed to the Chairman of  SAPMC to file appeal at the earliest. Copy of  such letter is produced by learned AAG which  is to be taken on record with first page of  cause   title   of   suit   Nos.32   of   2004,   which  confirms   that   present   petitioner   No.2   is  defendant No.1 in such suit whereas statement  of Jashvantbhai Prabhudasbhai Patel referred  hereinabove is petitioner No.4. Therefore, it  becomes   clear   that   present   petitioners   have  allowed   a   suit   by   SAPMC   filed   by   SAPMC  against   them   to   be   dismissed   for   want   of  prosecution because now they are elected Vice  Chairman   of   SAPMC   and   this   is   certainly   a  material   irregularity,   inasmuch   as   in   such  suit SAPMC has claimed Rs.52,00,000/­ (Rupees  Fifty Two Lacs Only) from the defendants.    

      

16. It is contended by the learned AAG that now  District   Registrar   has   to   prefer   a   First  Appeal   which   is   numbered   as   First   Appeal  Page 29 of 39 HC-NIC Page 29 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER (Stamp)   No.961   of   2017   before   this   Court  because there is delay in filing such appeal.  It   is   also   submitted   that   if   such   suit   is  allowed   then   petitioner   No.2   herein   would  have   to   pay   huge   amount   to   SAPMC   and,  therefore,   they   have   intentionally   allowed  the   Civil   Court,   Patan   to   dismiss   the   suit  for  want   of prosecution  by  remaining   absent  or by not adducing evidence or in any case,  by   not   proceeding   further   in   the   suit   in  accordance with law.  

17. If we peruse the provision of Section 44 to  46,   it   becomes   clear   that   Section  44   under  Chapter   VIII   regarding   Control   over   APMC   is  dealing   with   power   to   hold   inquiry.  Bare  reading   of   the   Section   makes   it   clear   that  the Director may of his own emotion, either  by   himself   or   by   an   officer   authorized   by  him,   inspect   or   cause   to   be   inspected   the  accounts   of   a   market   committee   or   hold   an  inquiry   of   an   affair   of   the   marketing  committee. During such inquiry, all members,  officers and servants of the committee shall  furnish   such   information   and   produce   such  documents   in   their   possession,   relating   to  the affairs of the committee, as the Director  or the officer may require. The Director and  Page 30 of 39 HC-NIC Page 30 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER Officer shall have the power to even summon  and   enforce   the   attendance   of   marketing  committee and to compel them to give evidence  and  to  produce  documents   and  thereby   having  same power of Civil Court as provided by the  Code   of Civil  Procedure,   1908.  The  Director  or   the   Officer,   as   the   case   may   be,   may  require   the   market   committee   either   as   a  result   of   the   inquiry   or   otherwise   to   do   a  particular thing or to abstain from doing a  particular   thing   which   they   consider  necessary for the purpose of this Act and to  call   for   written   reply   within   a   reasonable  time.

Whereas,  Section   45   is   regarding   Power   of  Director to provide performance of duties in  default of market committee whereby when such  authorities  are  satisfied  that  the  APMC  has  made   default   in performing  any  duty  imposed  on it imposed by it under this Act, may fix a  period   for   its   due   performance   and   if   the  duty   is   not   performed   within   the   period   so  fixed, the Director may appoint a person to  perform   it,   and   may   direct   the   expense   of  performing it and reasonable remuneration of  such   person   shall   be   forthwith   paid   by   the  committee.   In   case   of   non   payment   of   such  Page 31 of 39 HC-NIC Page 31 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER expenses   and  remuneration  may  make  an  order  directing   the   Bank   to   make   payment   of   such  amount in which any money of the committee is  deposited or from any similar securities.

Whereas,  Section   46  is   though   in   the   same  chapter,   it   is   regarding  Supersession   of  market committee  wherein there are ample and  wide   power  vested  with  the  State   Government  that   if   in   the   opinion   of   the   State  Government,   a   marketing   committee   is   not  competent   to   perform   or   persistently   makes  default  in  performing  the  duties   imposed   on  it by or under this Act or abuses its powers,  the State Government may, by notification in  the  Official   Gazette,   supersede   such   market  committee  only  with  one  proviso  that   before  issuing   such   notification,   the   State  Government   shall   give   a   reasonable  opportunity   to   the   market   committee   for  showing   cause   that   why   it   should   not   be  superseded and shall consider the explanation  and   objections,   if   any,   of   the   market  committee.    

18. Thereby the only condition for passing order  under   Section   46   is   to   afford   a   reasonable  opportunity to show cause and to consider the  Page 32 of 39 HC-NIC Page 32 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER objections and explanation and nothing more.  Therefore, when respondents have followed the  provisions of Sections 44 and 45 by calling  the  petitioners  to  rectify  their   errors  and  called   upon   them   to   show   cause   by   a   show  cause   notice     and   then   considered   their  objections   and   explanation   which   are  discussed   in   the   impugned   order,   there   is  clarity that the statutory provision has been  properly followed and, therefore, there is no  substance  in  the  submission  that   because   of  judgment and order dated 10.3.2017 in Special  Civil  Application  No.5307  and  5308  of  2017,  the impugned order cannot sustain. 

19. The record shows that there was intimation to  the   respondents   to   rectify   their   error   and  when they fail to do so, there is compliance  of   provision   of   Sections   44   and   45.   The  record   shows   that   at   least   in   the   case   of  irregularity   in   recruitment,   the   direction  under Sections 44 and 45 has been obeyed by  the petitioners but it would not rescue them  because   of   several   other   irregularities.   It  is also obvious that pursuant to report dated  5.1.2004, there is specific intimation to the  petitioners   to   rectify   their   irregularities  but they have failed to do so. All relevant  papers to that effect produced by the learned  Page 33 of 39 HC-NIC Page 33 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER AAG are to be taken on record. 

20. The respondents are relying upon the decision  in the case of  Gautambhai Devshankar Dave v.  State of Gujarat reported in 2004(1) GLH 603  which   confirms   that   even   violation   of  principle of natural justice will not per se  sufficient for holding that particular order  is invalid and that the Court is required to  examine   the   decision   making   process   of   the  authority   in   the   totality   of   the   facts,  circumstances and evidence on record and the  Court is not expected to examine the reasons  of   the   authority   as   if   sitting   in   appeal,  since such position in law is well settled.  It   is   also   held   that   if   there   is   no  jurisdictional   error   in   the   impugned   order  nor is there any error apparent on the record  of the authority, since High Court does not  sit   as   an   Appellate   Authority,   interference  with   pure  findings  of  fact  and  appreciation  of   evidence   on   record,   even   different   view  may be possible is unwarranted. 

21. Therefore,   when   market   committee   was   found  persistently   defaulter   in   performing   the  duties imposed on it by the Act or under the  Act and also by not following due procedure  coupled with administrative improprieties and  Page 34 of 39 HC-NIC Page 34 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER thereby abused its power to entail financial  loss,   the   order   under   Section   46   cannot   be  vitiated. It is further held that mis­use of  the   vehicle   is   also   material   irregularity.  For   all   such   determination,   the   Division  Bench of this High Court has relied upon the  following   passage   from   the   decision   in   the  case of Homi Jehangir Gheesta v. Commissioner  of Income Tax reported in 1961 (41) ITR 135  by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. 

"Applying   the   aforesaid   tests   if   the   order   of   the   authority   is   read   as   a  whole   it   becomes   clear   that   the   authority had considered every material  fact   for   and   against   the   petitioners;  and   the   pros   and   cons   of   the   evidence  have been considered; and the authority  has   not   taken   into   consideration   any  irrelevant   matters   nor   is   the   order  based   on   any   conjectures,   surmises   or  suspicions.   In   the   circumstances,   it  would not be permissible to examine the  order   of   the   authority   sentence   by  sentence so as to discover a minor lapse   or an incautious observation on which an  issue of law can be hanged.
23 Thus, it can be seen that if an order  is   based   on   several   grounds   some   of  which   are   not   in   existence   or  irrelevant,   even   then   it   can   be  sustained if the Court is satisfied that  the   authority   would   have   passed   the  order on the basis of other relevant and   existing grounds , and the  exclusion of  the irrelevant and non­existent grounds  could   not   have   affected   the   final  outcome. In the present case, it is not   possible   to   find   out   any   ground   which  Page 35 of 39 HC-NIC Page 35 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER can   be   stated   to   be   non­existent   or  irrelevant  and  hence  even   on  facts   the  aforesaid   decision   cannot   come   to   the  aid of the petitioners." 

It cannot be ignored that petitioner therein  namely; Gautambhai Devshankar Dave is one of  the defendant in Civil Suit Nos.32 of 2004. 

22. Respondents   are   also   relying   upon   the  decision   in   the   case   of  Varvabhai  Nathabhai  Rabari   v.   State   of   Gujarat   reported   in  2003(1) GLR 97  wherein also it is held that  scope of judicial scrutiny and review in such  cases  is  restricted  to  procedural  aspect   on  point   of   principles   of   natural   justice   or  where  order  is  so  perverse.  Therefore,  when  there   were   defaults   in   financial  irregularities,   the   Division   Bench   has  dismissed   the   petition   challenging   the  superseding APMC, Patan.   

 

23. Whereas,   petitioner   is   relying   upon   the  decision   in   the   case   of   State   of  Madhya  Pradesh   v.   Sanjay   Nagayach   reported   in   2013  (7) SCC 25 wherein it is held that a legally  elected Board of Directors cannot be put out  of office by an illegal order. However, it is  with   reference   to   the   Madhya   Pradesh  Cooperative   Societies   Act   and   removal   of  Page 36 of 39 HC-NIC Page 36 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER Director of District Cooperative Central Bank  wherein the provision is to the effect that  before   removal   of   direction,   there   must   be  `consultation'  of RBI and, therefore, it was  held   that   meaningful   and   effective  consultation   with   RBI   under   Section   53(1)  second proviso means furnishing copy of reply  filed   by   the   Board   of   Directors   of   Bank   to  various   charges   and   allegations   levelled  against   them   to   RBI   as   well   as   action  proposed by Joint Registrar after considering  said   reply   submitted   by   Board   of   Directors  and,   thereafter   views   expressed   will   be  relevant   material   for   Registrar   /   Joint  Registrar to decide that whether elected body  be superseded or not. In the reported case,  when   Joint   Registrar   fails   to   follow   such  provision of consultation of RBI, the Hon'ble  Supreme   Court   has   explained   that   what   the  word   consultation   means   and   concluded   that  when there is no consultation, the order of  superseding APMC is to be quashed. Therefore,  the   first   line   of   Head   Note   that  `legally  elected body cannot be put out of office by  an illegal order'  is to be read properly on  two   counts;   (1)   that   the   order   must   be  illegal and in the present case when there is  no   provision   for   consulting   any   authority  Page 37 of 39 HC-NIC Page 37 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER like   RBI   and   as   discussed   hereinabove   then  order   cannot   be   termed   as   illegal   and   when  State Government has ample powers based upon  their opinion to supersede the committee with  the   only   condition   of   fair   and   reasonable  opportunity and consideration of reply, I do  not   see   any   substance   or   reason   in   the  petition either to grant interim relief or to  keep   this   matter   pending   hereinafter   for  further hearing since now it does not require  any further scrutiny after present order. 

24. In  view  of  above   facts  circumstances,  there  is   no   substance   in   the   petition   and,  therefore petition stands dismissed. Thereby,  Interim Relief is also refused.   

(S.G. SHAH, J.) * Kotecha FURTHER ORDER Learned   advocate   Mr.V.C.   Vaghela   for   the  petitioners   is   requesting   to   continue   the  protection   granted   in   the   earlier   petition  being Special Civil Application Nos.5307 and  5308   of   2017.   However,   when   there   is   no  Interim  Relief  or  any  protection   granted   in  this matter till date, there is no question  Page 38 of 39 HC-NIC Page 38 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017 C/SCA/16003/2017                                                                                                 CAV ORDER of   extending   any   protection   a   fresh   when  petition   was   dismissed   on   merits   after  considering   all   rival   submissions.   In   any  case,   protection   if   any   granted   in   earlier  petition cannot be extended in such petition  and, therefore, such request is rejected. 

(S.G. SHAH, J.) * Kotecha Page 39 of 39 HC-NIC Page 39 of 39 Created On Tue Sep 26 00:57:12 IST 2017