1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 3195/2009. ( Ku. Vanita P. sable -: versus :- State of Maharashtra and others ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : JANUARY 27, 2010. Heard Shri P.S. Kshirsagar, learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 to 3. Short grievance is, impugned order as passed by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Buldhana (Shri N.R. Zine), under Section 57 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963 is illegal. As he is member of the Board of Directors of A.P.M.C. Buldhana; his appointment as Tribunal is not proper and in any case he could not have passed the impugned order. Learned A.G.P. appearing for respondents is supporting the impugned order by pointing out that it was only an ad-hoc arrangement made during the absence of Shri Sable, Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Buldhana. With the assistance of both the learned Counsel, I have perused the impugned order as also the reply affidavit and provisions of law. 2 By the impugned order dated 04.07.2009, recovery certificate under Section 57 of the Act, has been issued against the petitioner by respondent no.3 after holding quasi judicial proceeding. The nature of order is not in dispute at all. As per provisions under Section 13[1][f] of the APMC Act, the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies of the District or his representative is the member of A.P.M.C., but then he has no right to vote. It is therefore, apparent that because of this provision the Deputy Registrar or his representative get associated with A.P.M.C. Provisions of Section 57 thereof deal with recovery of sums due to Government or Market Committee. Its sub-section [4] states that the State Government can constitute one or more Tribunal consisting of Collector who has jurisdiction over the area for the said purpose. Its proviso enable the State Government to constitute a Tribunal consisting of one person other than Collector and possessing required qualification. But, then such person must not be connected with the Market Committee or a person from whom sum is alleged to be due. It is therefore apparent that the Deputy Registrar or his representative connected with the market committee cannot constitute a Tribunal. Perusal of reply affidavit filed by respondent no.2 before this Court reveals that one Shri G.P.Sable, was ex- officio member of the Board of Director from 11.08.2008 to 03.03.2009. As he was holding the charge of post of Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Buldhana Shri sable was then transferred and additional charge of the post of Shri sable was given to Shri N.R. Zine, who was then subsequently posted as Assistant Registrar, Cooperative 3 Societies (Administration) in the office of the District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Buldhana. Affidavit accepts that he was holding additional charge of the post of Shri Sable and was ex-officio member of the Market Committee from 03.03.2009 to 29.07.2009. However, it has been clarified that during this period Shri Zine never participated in any meeting of the market committee and was not involved with any work of the market committee. As already stated above, the impugned order is dated 04.07.2009. Thus during this period Shri Zine was Member of the Market Committee, Buldhana. It is therefore, apparent that he could not have passed any order in the matter. The said order is therefore quashed and set aside. The other contentions raised by the petitioner and respondents are left open for consideration at appropriate stage. It is open for the respondents to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and procedure under the Act. Writ Petition is thus allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule accordingly, with no order as to cost. JUDGE Rgd.