1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2699 OF 2011 (Dulichandji Hemraj Baghale & Ors. vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.) 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 & P.D. KODE, JJ. AUGUST 08, 2011. Heard Shri Ghare, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Kankale, learned AGP for the respondents. The challenge is to the order dated 30.05.2011 appointing Administrator on the Agriculture Produce Market Committee (APMC) Goregaon, District – Gondia. The petitioners were all on Board of Directors. Shri Ghare, learned counsel states that since February 2011, proposal to extend term of APMC was pending and hence it cannot be said that there was failure on the part of APMC to conduct elections. He further points out that perusal of reply affidavit reveals direction by State Government to Respondent No. 2 to appoint Administrator and hence decision to appoint Administrator is not taken by Respondent No. 2 independently. He is relying upon judgment of Division Bench in the case of Agriculture Produce Market Committee vs. State of Maharashtra, reported at 2010 (4) 2 ALL MR 324, to urge that such decision cannot be accepted in law to be decision of Respondent No. 2 and hence appointment of the Administrator accordingly must fall to ground. In the alternative and without prejudice, he further invites attention to communication dated 28.07.2011 to contend that the Government Officer then appointed as Administrator is now sought to be replaced by political supports of the State Government and thus Administration of APMC is being highjacked indirectly under the guise of appointing Administrator. The learned AGP is strongly opposing reference to or use of communication dated 28.07.2011. He states that copy of that communication is not served upon him and he is not aware of any such development. He further contends that the petitioners avoided to hold elections within the stipulated time and as Respondent No. 2 did not implement the provisions of law, hence the direction was issued by Respondent No. 1 – State Government. He further states that the Administrator is duty bound to comply with the process of election in accordance with law at the earliest. The petitioners have on 21.02.2011 sought extension of their tenure by contending that financial condition of APMC was bad and it was not in a position to meet the expenses of election. Today before us, it is argued that if the petitioners are continued on Board, they will immediately deposit necessary amount and 3 elections can be completed within a period of two months. We, therefore, find the resolution dated 21.02.2011 nothing but a ploy to continue in office as long as possible. It appears that the list of voters was forwarded to Respondent No. 2 belatedly and not in accordance with the provisions of Rule 36(2) of APMC Rules, 1967. The list submitted on 21.05.2011 was received by the office of respondent No. 2 on 27.05.2011 i.e. after expiry of tenure and it was required to be sent back for correction on 03.06.2011. The tenure had already expired on 07.04.2011. In this situation, we do not find anything wrong with the directions given by Respondent No. 1 to appoint Administrator. The petitioners are not in a position to demonstrate any right in them to continue to occupy the post though their tenure has expired. However, looking to the nature of controversy, we direct Respondents No. 1 & 2 to arrange to hold the elections of Agriculture Produce Market Committee within a period of two months from the date of communication of this order to it in accordance with the provisions of Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963, and Rules framed thereunder. It is made clear that A.B. Sangle, Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Taluka - Goregaon, already appointed as Administrator will continue as 4 Administrator unless he is transferred elsewhere and in that event the next incumbent working on that post shall continue as Administrator till elections are over. With these directions and observations, Writ petition is disposed of. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE *GS.