(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 2587 OF 2011 Dattatraya Gangaram Kadam, Age : 55 years, Occupation : Agriculturist, R/o. At Post Cholakha, Taluka : Jarikot, District : Nanded, and 10 others. .. Petitioners. versus The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Marketing and Textile Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, and 3 others. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. P.D. Bachate, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. S.K. Tambe, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1, 2 and 3. ........................ CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 31ST MARCH 2011 (2) COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard Adv. Mr. P.D. Bachate, for the petitioners, and learned AGP Mr. S.K. Tambe, for respondent nos.1 to 3. 2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 28-6-2010, passed by respondent no.3 / District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Nanded, thereby dissolving Managing Committee of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dharmabad, and appointing Administrator on it. The petitioners have also challenged the order dated 21-12-2010, passed by respondent no.2 / Director of Marketing, Pune, thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioners against the aforesaid order dated 28-6-2010. 3. It is apparent that body framing charges was aware that some of the charges i.e. charge nos.1 and 2 were pertaining to regime of earlier Board of Directors. Charges framed are for not taking necessary curative steps. The petitioners, apart from stating that they have terminated services of then Secretary who issued "no due certificate" and some notices for recovery, are not in a position to point out any other steps initiated for coercive recovery. The provisions of Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963, contain (3) necessary procedure in that respect. The authority has considered reply filed by the petitioners. The authority has also heard their Advocate and thereafter impugned order is passed. 4. I do not see any jurisdictional error or perversity. 5. In the result, the petition is dismissed. No costs. ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp2587