Gujarat High Court
Sunak Seva Sahkari Mandali Limited vs Authorised Officer And Co-Operative ... on 22 January, 2015
Author: M.R.Shah
Bench: M.R. Shah, G.B.Shah
C/SCA/1151/2015 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1151 of 2015
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
===========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see
the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as
to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any
order made thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
================================================================
SUNAK SEVA SAHKARI MANDALI LIMITED....Petitioner(s)
Versus
AUTHORISED OFFICER AND CO-OPERATIVE OFFICER (MARKET) &
2....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR DILIP B RANA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
Date : 22/01/2015
ORAL JUDGMENT
Page 1 of 7
C/SCA/1151/2015 JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH)
1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for an appropriate writ or order quashing and setting aside impugned decision of the Authorized Officer dated 12-1-2015 by which, on the objections raised by the respondent No.3 herein against inclusion of the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society in the Preliminary Voter's List of Agricultural Constituency, the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society are deleted.
2. The facts leading to the present Special Civil Application in nutshell are as under:
2.1 That the Election Programme came to be declared by the competent authority declaring the election of Directors of APMC, Unjha, vide notification dated 6-12-2014. That on the basis of the particulars furnished by the petitioner Society as required under Rule 7 of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market's Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for short), the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society, who was claiming to be dispensing the agricultural credit, were included in the Preliminary Voter's List of Agricultural Constituency. That the respondent No.3 herein raised objections against inclusion of the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society on the ground that as such the petitioner society is not dispensing with the agricultural credit at all. That the objections were served upon the petitioner Society. The petitioner Society replied to the said objections. However, on the basis of the materials produced on record, the Authorized Page 2 of 7 C/SCA/1151/2015 JUDGMENT Officer was of the opinion that as such the petitioner Society is not actually dispensing with the agricultural credit at all and it was a paper entry/hawala entry and no supporting documents such as application, Letter of Credits, Acceptance Letters, Promissory Note, Guarantee Bond and Credit Statement were produced before the Authorized Officer to establish and prove the actual dispensing of the agricultural credit. Therefore, the Authorized Officer, having satisfied that as such the petitioner Society is not dispensing with the agricultural credit at all, accepting the objections raised by the respondent No.3, by impugned order, has deleted/excluded the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society from the Provisional Voter's List.
2.2 That being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned decision of the Authorized Officer deleting/excluding the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society from the Provisional Voter's List of Agricultural Constituency, the petitioner Society has preferred the present Special Civil Application.
3. At the outset, it is required to be noted that as per the Election Programme, the last date for preparing and publishing the final voter's list is 22-1-2015 and though the petitioner Society was served with the impugned order on 13-1-2015, present Special Civil Application has been preferred by the petitioner at the last moment i.e. on 19-1-2015 i.e. only three days before the date of publication of the Final Voter's List.
4. Mr.Dilip Rana, the learned advocate appearing for the the petitioner, has vehemently submitted that the Authorized Page 3 of 7 C/SCA/1151/2015 JUDGMENT Officer has materially erred in passing the impugned order and directing to delete/exclude the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society from the Provisional Voter's List.
4.1 It is further submitted by Mr.Dilip Rana, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner that as such all the necessary documents were produced before the Authorized Officer and despite the same, the Authorized Officer had refused to consider the same and has taken the impugned decision by observing that the petitioner Society has not produced the relevant documents. It is submitted that as such the petitioner Society did produce all the documentary evidences such as application, Letter of Credits, Acceptance Letters, Promissory Note, Guarantee Bond and Credit Statement. However, the Authorized Officer refused to look into the same.
4.2 Mr.Dilip Rana, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has requested to consider the documents which are produced before this Court in support of his submissions that the petitioner Society is actually dispensing with the agricultural credit.
4.3 Making the above submissions, it is requested to admit/allow the present petition and direct the respondent No.1-Authorized Officer to include the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society in the Final Voter's List which is to be published today i.e. on 22-1- 2015. No other submissions have been made.
Page 4 of 7C/SCA/1151/2015 JUDGMENT
5. The present petition is opposed by Mr.Dhawan Jayswal, learned Asstt. Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1-Authorized Officer. An affidavit-in-reply is filed by the Authorized Officer specifically and categorically denying that the petitioner Society produced any supporting documents such as application, Letter of Credits, Acceptance Letters, Promissory Note, Guarantee Bond and Credit Statement on the basis of which, it could have been proved or established that the petitioner Society was in fact and actually dispensing with the agricultural credit. It is further submitted that on the basis of documents, which are produced on record and even on the basis of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner Society as well as the respondent No.3, when it was found that it was only a hawala entry/entry in the books of accounts on the alleged credit and in fact the petitioner Society was not dispensing with the agricultural credit at all, the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society are rightly excluded by the Authorized Officer. It is submitted that the names of the members of the Managing Committee of only those Co-operative Society/Societies are required to be included who are actually dispensing with the agricultural credit. It is submitted that therefore, as such, no error has been committed by the Authorized Officer in passing the impugned order/decision.
5.1 Mr.Dhawan Jayswal, learned Asstt. Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent Authorized Officer has also requested not to entertain the present petition at this belated stage more particularly when today is the date for publication of Final Voter's List.
Page 5 of 7C/SCA/1151/2015 JUDGMENT
6. Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties at length.
7. At the outset, it is required to be noted that the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society were included in the Preliminary Voter's List of Agricultural Constituency on the basis that the petitioner Society is dispensing with the agricultural credit. Against which, objections were raised by the respondent No.3 contending inter alia that as such, the petitioner Society is not actually dispensing with the agricultural credit. The copy of the objections were served upon the petitioner. The petitioner appeared before the Authorized Officer; filed its reply to the objections and produced documents and on the basis of the material on record, it appears that only books of accounts, balance sheet and audit report have been produced. From the impugned order, it appears that the petitioner did not produce any supporting documents such as application, Letter of Credits, Acceptance Letters, Promissory Note, Guarantee Bond and Credit Statement in support of its case that the petitioner Society is actually dispensing with the agricultural credit. Under the circumstances, the Authorized Officer accepted the objections raised by the respondent No.3 and did not include the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society in the Provisional Voter's List. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that aforesaid documents were produced before the Authorized Officer but the Authorized Officer refused to look into the same. The aforesaid aspect is categorically and specifically denied by the Authorized Officer in his affidavit-in-reply. Thus, there is word against word. If, according to the petitioner, the Authorized Officer deliberately Page 6 of 7 C/SCA/1151/2015 JUDGMENT and with mala fide intention did not look into the documents which were produced, the natural conduct on the part of the petitioner would have been to send the same immediately by RPAD and/or would have made the grievance in writing immediately. No such grievance appears to have been made by the petitioner immediately even after the impugned decision. If the aforesaid documents would have been produced by the petitioner, the genuineness of dispensing with the agricultural credit by the petitioner Society would have been established and/or proved. However, in the absence of aforesaid documentary evidences, when the Authorized Officer found that there was no actual dispensing with the agricultural credit but only the entries were made in the books of accounts and on the valid reason, it is found that the petitioner Society is as such not dispensing with the agricultural credit and therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the Authorized Officer has committed any error and/or illegality in passing the impugned decision and/or not including the names of the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society in the Provisional Voter's List.
8. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present petition fails and the same deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.
(M.R.SHAH, J.) (G.B.SHAH, J.) RADHAN Page 7 of 7