The question raised in this petition is that the election of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Thara was going on and at the midst of the election one Member of Legislative Assembly, Shri Magansinh Chamansinh Waghela , the respondent No.4 herein addressed a letter dated 6.12.2000 to the State Govt and upon the said letter the State Govt in purported exercise of powers under section 48 of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Act(hereinafter referred to as "the Act") passed order dated 23.12.2000 whereby the going on election of the Market Committee is stayed. Mr.Zaveri for the petitioner has submitted that the election had reached the stage of filing of nomination forms but since the group of respondent No.4 realised that they are not in a position to procure the majority, the party in power at the State level was approached with a view to see that they may not have to face the democratic process of election and the election is stayed in exercise of powers under Section 48 of the Act.
2.Affidavit in reply is filed by one S.A.Shaikh, Deputy Secretary, Agricultural, Cooperation Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar on behalf of respondent-State and at para 5 it has been stated by the deponent that the election is postponed pursuant to the order which is passed in exercise of powers under section 48 of the Act.
3.Mr.Kothak for the respondent No.1 has submitted that it can not be said that the order is without jurisdiction and Mr.Devang Vyas appearing for Mr.Tushar Mehta for respondent Nos 5 to 9 also supported the order passed by the State Govt.
4.Considering the rival submissions of the parties, primafacie, it appears that the State Govt has no power to interfere with the process of election which is being held by the Director, Agricultural Marketing & Rural Finance under section 48 of the Act. Primafacie, power under section 48 of the Act can be exercised only in the matter where there is any dispute or challenge to any order or proceedings of the Market Committee or the Director. Further, the aggrieved party can invoke powers under section 48 of the Act before the State Govt which are in the nature of quasi judicial revisional powers. So far as the powers of the Director for holding the election is concerned, primafacie, it appears that as per the provisions of Act and Rules, the same is only under the control of the Director and in the matter of holding of election the power under section 48 of the Act are not attracted. Further, in any case, the State Govt.has invoked its powers under section 48 of the Act at the instance and upon the application of one MLA who is respondent No.4 herein. When the Director was holding the election pursuant to statutory functions, primafacie, it appears that the respondent No.4 has no business to interfere with or to make any application to the State Govt nor the State Govt had any power or authority to postpone or stay the ongoing election which has reached the stage of filing of nomination forms. It is well settled principle of law that the elections must be held within time bound programme as early as possible and it is the mandate of the legislature with a view to achieve the democratic principles. Primafacie, it also appears that the powers in the present case have been exercised on extraneous considerations and in any event the exercise of power is beyond the scope and ambit of section 48 of the Act. Not only that, but as per well settled principles of law, the election must be completed as early as possible and in any event if the election is not held the same should be held within time bound programme as provided under the statute with a view to see that the power vests with the elected representative of the people and executives may not create any hindrance for taking any undue benefit which is not warranted by the legislature.
5.Considering the above, I am of the view that if the election is not permitted, the purpose would be frustrated and as a result thereof the executive will continue to hold the power as the administrator and will of the people by electing their representative will not be reflected. Therefore, I am of the primfacie view that in the present case it is just and proper to direct the respondent No.2 to hold the election of Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Thara and to complete the same within a period of three months within three months from today. I am of the view that in view of special circumstances, as stated above, prima facie, the direction to hold election should be granted.
6.Hence, Rule. By way of interim relief, it is directed that the respondent No.2 shall hold the election of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Thara and complete the same within a period of three months from today.
7.The election which will be held shall be subject to further orders of this court and it will be open to either party to move the court after the election result is declared.
2.4.2002(JAYANT PATEL,J)