1 / 4 62.wp7582.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 7582 OF 2026 RAVINDRA S/O RAMESHRAO BIHADE AND OTHERS. VS THE COLLECTOR, AKOLA AND OTHERS. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and Registrar's orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.M. Ghare, Advocate a/w Mr. Ram Karode, Advocate for petitioners. Ms. M.R. Kavimandan, AGP for respondent/State. Mr. N.A. Gawande, Advocate for respondent No.10. CORAM : NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 28.09.2026 The present petition challenges the order of the respondent No.2 - Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Amravati in a revision preferred under Section 43 of the Maharashtra Agriculture Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963. 2. The facts which are more or less not in dispute are that on 30.03.2023 elections of the APMC, Telhara were held and the respondent No.10 was elected as a Chairman of the said APMC. Prity 2 / 4 62.wp7582.2026 3. On 17.08.2026, a requisition was called for special meeting for ‘No Confidence Motion’ against the respondent No.10. Thereafter, notice dated 24.08.2026 was issued to hold the said special meeting as per the provisions of Section 23-A of the Maharashtra Agriculture Produce Marketing (Development & Regulation) Act. The said notice was challenged before this Court by filing a writ petition on 28.08.2026. However, the said writ petition was withdrawn since motion of no confidence was passed by majority on 31.08.2026. 4. Pursuant to the passing of ‘No Confidence Motion’ as post of Chairman of the APMC, Telhara, was falling vacant, the respondent No.3 issued an order of 01.09.2026, appointing the respondent No.11 as an authorised/Election Officer for election for the post of Chairman. Thereafter, on 11.09.2026, election program came to be published for the election of the Chairman of the APMC, Telhara. The respondent No.10 in the backdrop of these facts chose to challenge the said motion of no confidence as also declaring the election program before the respondent No.2 by filing a revision under Section 43 of the said Act. Vide impugned order dated 21.09.2026, the respondent No.2 has granted an ad- Prity 3 / 4 62.wp7582.2026 interim stay to the ‘No Confidence Motion’ as also to the proposed election of the Chairman. 5. I have heard Mr. Ghare, learned counsel for the petitioner as also Mr. Gawande, who appears for the respondent No.10 i.e. the contesting respondent. 6. As can be seen from the impugned order the only aspect which are weighed with the respondent No.2 is that there is a breach of principles of natural justice inasmuch as the respondent No.10 was not granted an opportunity to putforth his side. However, the respondent No.2 seems to be lost sight of the fact that provisions of Article of 23-A are strongly worded inasmuch as the said provision and more particularly, sub-section (1) thereof, contemplates that the moment motion of no confidence is passed, the Chairman or the Vice- Chairman shall cease forthwith to be a Chairman or the Vice-Chairman and therefore, there is no question of granting any opportunity to the respondent No.10, more particularly, when a special meeting was conveyed by following procedure as contemplated under Section 23-A thereof. There is no question of granting any opportunity moreso, when a managing committee of the APMC passes a Prity 4 / 4 62.wp7582.2026 ‘No Confidence Motion’. Even though, it is disputed by Mr. Gawande, that ‘No Confidence Motion’ was not passed by majority since some of the Directors, who voted against the respondent No.10 were either disqualified or either deemed to be disqualified. 7. I am hardly impressed by these contentions of the leaned counsel for the respondent No.10. Therefore, it would be in the fitness of things, to allow the petition and quashed and set aside the impugned order. In the result, the following order is passed. 8. The writ petition is allowed. 9. Order dated 21.09.2026 passed by the respondent No.2 – Divisional Joint Registrar, Co- operative Societies, Amravati, is quashed and set aside. 10. Needless to mention that respondent No.2 would decide the revision on its own merits in accordance with law. [ NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J. ] Prity Signed by: Mrs. Prity Gabhane Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 30/09/2026 18:54:56