Babarao S/O Shyamraoji Shid & ... vs State Of Maharashtra & Others
2016 Latest Caselaw 6267 Bom

     2710WP6350.05-Judgment                                                              1/2


                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                    
                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.




                                                            
                         WRIT PETITION NO. 6350    OF    2005

     PETITIONERS :-                1. Babarao S/o Shyamraoji Shid, aged about 48
                                      years, occupation agriculturist, r/o  Kawtha,




                                                           
                                      at Post Sindhi, Taluka Nagpur Gramin, Dist.
                                      Nagpur. 

                                   2. Arun   s/o   Shyamraoji   Mahakalkar,   aged
                                      about 40 years, occupation agriculturist, r/o




                                               
                                      Khapri, Post Khapri, Tahsil and Dist. Nagpur.
                              ig          ...VERSUS... 

     RESPONDENTS :-                1.   State   of   Maharashtra,   Department   of
                            
                                        Cooperation,   Marketing   and   Textile,
                                        Mantralaya Annexe, Mumbai-32.

                                   2.   The Director of Marketing, Central Building
      

                                        Maharashtra State, Pune. 

                                   3.   District   Deputy   Registrar,   Cooperative
   



                                        Societies, Nagpur.  

                                   4.   The Collector, Nagpur. 





                                   5.   The Sub-Divisional Officer, Nagpur. 

                                   6.   Agricultural   Produce   Market   Committee,
                                        Kalmana   Market,   Nagpur,   through   its
                                        Secretary. 





                                   7.   The   Administrator   namely   Shri   Rameshwar
                                        H.   Parate,   Agricultural   Produce   Market
                                        Committee, Kalmana Market, Nagpur. 

                                   8.   Sambhaji   s/o   Ramaji   Wadibhasme,   aged
                                        about 40 years, occupation agriculturist, r/o
                                        at post Neri, Taluka Kamptee, Dist. Nagpur.  




    ::: Uploaded on - 27/10/2016                            ::: Downloaded on - 28/10/2016 00:12:05 :::
      2710WP6350.05-Judgment                                                                         2/2


     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




                                                                                               
                                      None for the petitioners.
        Mr. A.R.Chutake, Asstt. Govt.Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 to 5. 




                                                                    
                             None for the respondent Nos.6 and 7.
                Shri P. C. Madkholkar, counsel for the respondent No.8. 
     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            CORAM : SMT. VASANTI    A    NAIK & 




                                                                   
                                                        KUM. INDIRA JAIN,   JJ.

DATED : 27.10.2016

O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt.Vasanti A Naik, J.)

By this writ petition, the petitioners have sought a

declaration that the impugned order dated 25/10/2005 extending the

term of office of the members of the respondent No.6 is just, proper and

legal. The petitioners had also sought a direction against the respondent

No.1 to extend the term of the office of the market committee.

It is apparent from a reading of the prayer clause that the

cause for filing the writ petition is rendered infructuous due to passage

of time. The term of office of the market committee is five years and

the term cannot be extended beyond one year. If that be so, the cause

of action in the petition filed in the year 2005 would not survive.

Hence, we dismiss the writ petition with no order as to

costs. Rule stands discharged.

                                  JUDGE                                                JUDGE 
     KHUNTE