Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Gujarat · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1699 (GUJ)

VIKRAMSINH NATHUBHA RANA v. KHUSHALBHAI GANDABHAI PATEL

SCA/8869/2026 · 2026-07-02

Nirzar S Desai

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

C/SCA/8869/2026 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8869 of 2026 ========================================================== VIKRAMSINH NATHUBHA RANA Versus KHUSHALBHAI GANDABHAI PATEL & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR NV SOLANKI(860) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 Ld. G.P. G.H.VIRK ASSISTED BY DHARITRI PANCHOLI AND SHAUNAK VYAS AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR DIPAN DESAI(2481) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI Date : 02/07/2026 ORDER 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. N.V. Solanki for the petitioner, Learned G.P. G.H.Virk assisted by learned AGP Dharitri Pancholi and Shaunak Vyas for the respondent No. 2 and learned advocate Mr. Dipen Desai for respondent No.1. 2. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Solanki seeks permission from this Court to implead the Director, Agriculture Marketing and Rural Finance as Respondent No.3. Permission as prayed for is granted. 3. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs; a) to admit this petition. Page 1 of 4 C/SCA/8869/2026 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2026 b) Taking into due consideration the grounds of this petition, to issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, and/or order under the constitution of India, inter alia quashing and setting aside the order of the Director, Agricultural Market and village economy Gandhinagar, State of Gujarat, passed on 25.6.2026 in Appeal No.54/2026 filed by the present respondent no.1, after declaring such order as illegal, ultra-vires, without jurisdiction, null and void ab-initio and having been passed in flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice and hence, unsustainable at law. c) In view of the specific direction issued by the Director to the election officer to hold a fresh election of Chairman of the APMC, Lakhtar immediately, the execution and further implementation of the aforesaid impugned order of the Director dated 25.6.2026 in any manner whatsoever may kindly be stayed forthwith during the pendency and final disposal of this writ petition by this Hon'ble Court as and by way of ad- interim relief. d) Any other order that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, be passed; 4. At the outset, an attention was drawn by learned GP Mr. Virk as well as learned advocate Mr. Desai that the order passed by the Director is an order which can be challenged by C/SCA/8869/2026 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2026 way of a revision application before the State Government under Section 48 of the APMC Act. 5. Learned advocate Mr. N.V. Solanki could not point out anything contrary to that, though he insisted that the matter be heard on merit. However, Section 48 of the APMC Act reads as under: “Section 48. Powers of State Government to call for proceedings of market committee and to pass orders thereon”. “The State Government may at any time call for and examine the proceedings of the Director or of any market committee for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any decision or order passed by the Director or the market committee. In any case in which it appears to the State Government that any decision or order or proceedings so called for should be modified, annulled or reversed, the State Government may pass such order thereon as it thinks fit.” 6. It was pointed out by learned counsels appearing for the respondents that the language of Section 48 covers the powers of examining the proceedings of the Director as well, and therefore, the present order can be challenged by way of a revision application before the State Government. Page 3 of 4 C/SCA/8869/2026 ORDER DATED: 02/07/2026 7. In view of that, as the alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, without entering into the merits of the matter, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy available to the petitioner as per the provisions of the Act. 8. With the above direction, the petition is disposed of. (NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) BHAVIN MEHTA Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE ONE, at High Court of Gujarat on 03/07/2026 15:09:03