Vijaybhai Pravinbhai Koli vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

Vijaybhai Pravinbhai Koli vs State Of Gujarat on 15 April, 2025

                                                                                                             NEUTRAL CITATION




                              C/SCA/4924/2025                                  ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025

                                                                                                              undefined




                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                       R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4924 of 2025

                       ==========================================================
                                                      VIJAYBHAI PRAVINBHAI KOLI
                                                                Versus
                                                      STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MR. H. A. CHHATRIWALA (14649) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                       D K PATEL (7571) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                       MR G.H. VIRK, LD. GOVERNMENT PLEADER WITH MS DHARITRI
                       PANCHOLI, LD.AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3,5
                       MR DILIP RANA, LD. ADVOCATE for Respondent No.2.
                       ==========================================================

                          CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT

                                                           Date : 15/04/2025

                                                            ORAL ORDER

1. This petition is filed with the following prayers:

"A. Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow the present petition.

B. Issue an appropriate Writ of Mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction, directing Respondent Nos. 2 and 5 to immediately stay the APMC elections scheduled/proposed to be conducted, pending conclusion of the inquiry initiated by the District Collector.

C. Issue an appropriate Writ of Certiorari to quash any notification/resolution/order Mark as Annexure A and Mark as Annexure E issued by the Respondent No. 2 or 5 with respect to the conduct of the APMC elections in violation of the principles of natural justice and public interest.

D. Direct Respondent No. 3 to file a detailed status report regarding the inquiry proceedings within a stipulated time.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4924/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025 undefined E. Direct constitution of an independent or court-monitored committee to supervise the inquiry and ensure fairness in the process.

F. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem just, fit and proper in the interest of justice."

2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Chhatriwala for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader Mr.G.H.Virk for respondent Nos.1, 3 & 5 and learned advocate Mr.Dilip Rana for respondent No.2

- APMC, Zhalod.

3. Learned advocate Mr.Chhatriwala for the petitioner submitted that Agenda dated 03.04.2025 (Annexure "E" Page-

107) was circulated for scheduling the election on 17.04.2025, for second term of Chairman of Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC for short), Zhalod. The said agenda was circulated under Rule 31 of The Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as "the APMC Rules"); which provides for election of Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Market Committee, and the procedure to be followed for the same.

3.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that for the irregularities committed by the present Chairman, the petitioner being Vice Chairman of APMC, Zhalod, has made complaint before respondent No.3 authority. As stated in the complaint, there are several irregularities of serious nature, Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Wed Apr 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 16 22:26:04 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4924/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025 undefined committed by the present chairman. Misappropriation of Market Committee's funds is also complained. The decision on complaint after due inquiry, is yet to be taken and therefore election for the post of chairman for second term, may not be permitted before inquiry in to complaint. Therefore, the agenda dated 03.04.2025, deserves to be stayed.

Reliance is also placed on the criminal complaint filed against the present Chairman, and sent to the police authority through Regd.A.D..

4. Strenuously opposing the present petition, learned Government Pleader Mr.G.H.Virk for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 5, by placing reliance on Rule 31 of the APMC Rules, submitted that election of Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Market Committee can be held as provided under the Rules. Accordingly, agenda dated 03.04.2025 was circulated informing to the members of Market Committee, Zhalod, to have the election on 17.04.2025 at 11:30 am. Members of the Market Committee are as many as 17 in numbers and a list of them is annexed at Annexure "B" (Page-101). Out of these 17 members, one of them would be elected as Chairman of the Market Committee. Therefore, it is presumption on the part of the petitioner that the present Chairman will be re-elected as Chairman of APMC, Zhalod, for the second term also.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4924/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025 undefined

5. Further, the petitioner being Vice Chairman, has made a complaint before respondent no.3 and pendency of complaint would not preclude the present chairman to participate in the election of chairman for second term. Moreover, in this case the process of election has begun. Therefore, as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shaji K. Joseph V/s. V. Viswanath and others reported in (2016)4 SCC 429, once election process is initiated, interference in the process of election is not permissible. Therefore, this petition deserves rejection.

6. Learned advocate Mr.Dilip Rana for respondent No.2 submitted that the election process was initiated as permitted under Rule 31 of the APMC Rules and therefore, this petition does not deserve consideration.

7. Considered the submissions and documents on record. It is noticed that this petition is filed challenging the agenda for scheduling the meeting for election of Chairman on 17.04.2025 at 11:30 am. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the present chairman of APMC, Zhalod is one of the proposed candidates to be elected as Chairman for the second term and against him a complaint is filed. It is also noticed that this election of Chairman is to be contested by as many as 17 members and out of them, anyone can be elected as Chairman Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Wed Apr 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 16 22:26:04 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4924/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025 undefined of the Market Committee and therefore, it is presumption on part of the petitioner that once again the present Chairman will be elected as Chairman for the second term.

8. Moreover, complaint against present chairman is made before respondent no.3 and mere filing of complaint would not preclude the present chairman to participate and contest the election. Further, the process of election has begun and therefore the prayer prayed for staying the election process, in the opinion of this Court, is contrary to the settled legal position as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shaji K. Joseph V/s. V. Viswanath and others reported in (2016)4 SCC 429, wherein it is held as under :

"15. In our opinion, the High Court was not right in interfering with the process of election especially when the process of election had started upon publication of the election program on 27.01.2011 and more particularly when an alternative statutory remedy was available to Respondent no.1 by way of referring the dispute to the Central Government as per the provisions of Section 5 of the Act read with Regulation 20 of the Regulations. So far as the issue with regard to eligibility of Respondent no.1 for contesting the election is concerned, though prima facie it appears that Respondent no.1 could contest the election, we do not propose to go into the said issue because, in our opinion, 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 that 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 court's order. Very often, for frivolous reasons, candidates or others Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Wed Apr 16 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 16 22:26:04 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4924/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025 undefined 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 view that all disputes with regard to election should be dealt with only after completion of the election."

9. In view of the above, this court does not find any merit in the petition and the same is therefore rejected.

(MAUNA M. BHATT,J) DIPTI PATEL...