Madhya Pradesh High Court
Someshwar Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 April, 2017
-: 19 :-
Writ Petition No.2176 of 2017.
04.04.2017:-
Shri A.K.Sethi, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Arpit
Oswal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Rohit Mangal, learned Govt. Advocate for the
Respondent No.1/State, on advance copy.
Shri Kamal Airen, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2, on Caveat.
Heard on the question of admission.
Issue show-cause notice to the Respondents. Since the Respondent No.2 has already appeared on Caveat, therefore, no notice is necessary.
Also heard for grant of interim relief. The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 28.03.2017 by which he has been removed from the post of Chairman and Member of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti (Marketing Committee) Indore and further disqualified for the period of 6 years to contest the election of Member of Mandi Samiti, by the Managing Director in exercise of powers under Section 55 of the M. P. Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972. It is alleged that 88 shops constructed in the premises of Krishi Upaj Mandi, Indore were put to auction in the year 2009 under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi (Allotment of Land and Structures) Rules, 2009. The petitioner was Chairman of Marketing Committee constituted under Section 11 of Mandi Adhiniyam. For 9 -: 19 :- shops under reserved category, the up-set price of Rs.1,83,400-00 and the bids were received from 22.26 lakhs to 33.51 lakhs. In the year 2011 again these 9 shops were put under auction with the up-set price of Rs.7,64,309-00 and 14 bidders has offered the price 9.75 lakhs which was very low as compared to the price offered in the auction in the year 2009. It has been alleged that by accepting such bid the petitioner has caused the huge financial losses to the Mandi by not obtaining the directions from the Competent Authority. It is not disputed that the said auction was not finalized and later on the said allotment was cancelled by the Mandi and such cancellation is under challenge in the writ petition is pending before this Court filed by the successful bidders in whose favour the agreement has been executed.
The petitioner, who was holding the post of Chairman in the year 2011 and the said period has came to an end after completing 5 years terms. Thereafter again the petitioner has been elected as a Chairman and at present holding the post of the Chairman in the same Krishi Upaj Mandi. Therefore, the petitioner has challenged the authority of the Managing Director that no action can be taken under Section 55 against him in respect of the period which has already been over. Section 55 of Adhiniyam, 1972 is applicable for removal of any Chairman or Vice-Chairman of a market committee from his office, for misconduct, or neglect of or incapacity to perform his duty in his current -: 19 :- tenure.
Shri Sethi, learned Senior Counsel submits that there is no provision in the entire Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam for taking any action against the Chairman for the period which has already been over. When the competency of Managing Director and applicability of Section 55 is under challenged, the writ petition cannot be dismissed prima-facie for want of alternative remedy under Section 59 of the Adhiniyam, 1972.
The operation of the order dated 28.03.2017 (Annexure-P/1) shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.
The Respondents are directed to file the reply. List thereafter.
Cc as per rules.
[ VIVEK RUSIA ] JUDGE (AKS)