Krantikari Jai Hind Sensa Through Mr. Sudesh Shrikant Salgaonkar v. State Of Maharashtra And ORS.

skn 1/2 100.15-pil.sxw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 100 OF 2015 Krantikari Jai Hind Sensa.

...

Petitioner.

V/s.

State of Maharashtra and others.

...

Respondents.

Ramchandra Kachare for the petitioner.

M.M.Pabale, AGP for the State.

CORAM :

DR.MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J.

AND M.S.SONAK, J.

DATE :

22nd December 2016.

P.C. :

The main contention of the petitioner seems to be illegal collection of certain amount as commission from the farmers who bring their goods to the yard of Agricultural Produce Market Committee. On the earlier occasion, finding fault with the petitioner impleading several persons as party respondents without even describing proper designation of fourth respondent, petitioner was allowed to carry out amendment. According to the petitioner, one Dr.Subhash Mane described as Ex-Director, Marketing, State of Maharashtra, Pune passed a restraint order directing not to collect any amount from the farmers, however, the said order came to be

skn 2/2 100.15-pil.sxw stayed by the Government. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

2.

During the course of submission after lot of persuasion, what we understand is, the said direction of Dr.Subhash Mane, which was stayed by the State Government, was later on withdrawn as per the newspaper report but still the collection of commission from the farmers is continued is the stand of the petitioner. 3.

If the petitioner is aggrieved by the stay of the order passed by Dr.Subhash Mane which, according to them, is withdrawn we fail to understand on whose instruction or information the petitioner is still continuing to pursue its grievance of collection of commission from the farmers. If there were to be newspaper report, no such newspaper report is being placed before us which came to their knowledge during the pendency of this petition. 4.

We are, therefore, of the opinion that if such grievance of collection of commission still persists, they must make a representation to the concerned authority or the Minister concerned who is in-charge of Agricultural Produce Market Committees to look into the matter and take an appropriate course of action. With this liberty reserved in favour of the petitioner, the petition is disposed of. (M.S.SONAK, J.) CHIEF JUSTICE