Vasant S/O Dadarao Bhoyar, And ... vs District Deputy Registrar, Co ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 2162 Bom

WP  4845/13                                         1                             Judgment

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                  NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
                       WRIT PETITION No. 4845/2013
1.    Vasant S/o Dadarao Bhoyar,
      Aged About 57 Years, Occupation-
      Secretary A.P.M.C. Umarkhed Dist
      Yavatmal, R/o Patil Nagar, Near
      Telephone Exchange Umarkhed,
      dist: Yavatmal.
2.    Agriculture Produce Market
      Committee, Umarkhed, Distt.
      Yavatmal, through its Chairman,
      Umarkhed District Yavatmal.                                          PETITIONERS

                                   .....VERSUS.....
1.    District Deputy Registrar,
      Co-operative Societies, Yavatmal,
      Tahsil And District, Yavatmal.

2.    The Maharashtra State Agriculture
      Marketing Board, Plot No.R-7,
      Market Yard, Gultekdi, Pune :
      411 037. Through Managing Director.
3.    Anup S/o Narayan Jawalkar,
      Aged Adult, R/o Natthuwadi,
      Post Darwah, District: Yavatmal.
      Also C/o Agriculture Produce Market
      Committee, Umarkhed, Distt.Yavatmal.                                   RESPONDENTS

                               None for the petitioners.
        Ms N.P. Mehta, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent no.1.
                 Shri A.P. Kalmegh, counsel for the respondent no.2.

                                    CORAM :SMT.VASANTI  A  NAIK AND
                                                MRS. SWAPNA  JOSHI, JJ.    

DATE : 3 RD MAY, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT.VASANTI A NAIK, J.)

By this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a declaration

that the respondent no.2-Board has no authority in law to appoint the

secretary on the petitioner no.2-Market Committee when the petitioner

no.1 is working as a secretary of the Market Committee.

WP 4845/13 2 Judgment

2. Shri Kalmegh, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2, on

instructions from the respondent no.2, states that the cause for filing this

writ petition is rendered infructuous as the petitioner no.1, who was

working as the secretary of the Market committee at the time of filing of

the writ petition has retired on attaining the age of superannuation, on

30.04.2014. It is stated that since it was the case of the petitioners that

the respondent no.2-Board could not have appointed a secretary when the

petitioner no.1 was working as a secretary of the market committee, the

cause for filing the writ petition would be rendered infructuous in view of

the retirement of the petitioner no.1.

3. It appears from the statement made by the learned counsel

for the respondent no.2 that the cause for filing the writ petition is

rendered infructuous. Hence, we dispose of the writ petition with no

order as to costs.

               JUDGE                                             JUDGE

APTE