- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD v. AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE
C/SCA/20851/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20851 of 2016
===========================================================
SUKHSAR VIBHAG MOTAKADNI KHETI VISHAYAK VIVIDH KARYAKARI
SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.....Petitioner(s) Versus
AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE & 2....Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance:
MR MA KHARADI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 3 ================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
Date : 23/12/2016
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned advocate Mr. M. A. Kharadi for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside order dated 15.11.2016 and thereby, quashing and setting aside the final voters list published on 16.11.2016 and thereby, the second primary list dated 03.11.2016 qua the petitioner society may be restored.
3. The petitioner society is aggrieved with the list of voters published for the elections to Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Fatehpura. It is sought to be contended that the respondent Election Officer failed to verify the documents produced by the petitioner society and did not accept the objection and second list dated 03.11.2016 was published. The first list was published on 15.10.2016. The preparation of voters' list is integral part of election process. The elections to the APMC is due and imminent.
4. No amount of arguments on merits could be
Page 1 of 3
countenanced at this stage by the writ court as the court would be loathed to interfere with the elections when they are due and imminent and the process has started with preparation of list of voters.
5. The law is reiterative that the writ court would normally not interfere once the election process is underway. This dictum, well-settled by caravan of decisions of the Supreme Court as well as by this Court, is true whether it is elections to local body or elections of any democratic domestic body such as cooperative society. It is also well-settled that all election disputes relating to alleged irregularities or illegalities in course of the election have to be postponed for their solution, to be tried and settled after the elections are over in accordance with the machinery provided for resolution of such disputes.
5.1 This trite proposition has been holding the field right from the decision in N. P. Ponnuswami Vs Returning Officer [AIR 1952 SC 64] and caravan of other decisions, of which a more recent decision in Shaji K. Joseph Vs V. Viswanath [(2016) 4 SCC 429] may be referred to, which reiterated the principle in the following words,
"... as per the settled law, the High Court should not have interfered with the election after the process of election had commenced. The judgments referred to hereinabove clearly show the settled position of law to the effect whenever the process of election starts, normally courts should not interfere with the process of election for the simple reason that if the process of election is interfered with by the courts, possibly no election would be completed without the court's order. Very often, for frivolous reasons, candidates or others approach the courts and by virtue of interim orders passed by courts, the election is delayed or cancelled and in such a case the basic purpose of having election and getting an elected body to run the administration is frustrated. For the aforestated reasons, this court has taken a
Page 2 of 3
view that all disputes with regard to election should be dealt with only after completion of the election. … … " (Para 15)
6. The petitioner has got post election remedy under Rule 28 of Gujarat Agriculture Produce Market Committee Rules.
7. For the foregoing reasons, without adverting into the merits of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits, the petition is not entertained leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue remedy after elections are over, by challenging the election in accordance with law as may be advised. It is observed that if such remedy is availed by the petitioner, such proceedings shall be expeditiously dealt with and decided by the competent forum.
The petition stands dismissed on the aforesaid ground alone.
Notice is discharged.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J.)
chandrashekhar
Page 3 of 3
Alert