ARIF AMAJADKHAN PATHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

                                                        905-WP-13200-2025

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                  WRIT PETITION NO. 13200 OF 2025


Arif Amajadkhan Pathan                                             ...Petitioner
      Versus
The State Of
Maharashtra And Others                                           ...Respondents

                                 ——————
Mr. Satyajeet A. Rajeshirke (Through VC) a/w. mr. Gautam R. Kulkarni,
Mr. Rajvardhan S. Rane, Advocate for petitioner.


Mr. R. L. Chavan a/w. Ms. Shivali R. Chavan a/w. Mr. Dhanajay Rane a/w.
Ms. Siddheshwari R. Chavan, Advocate for respondent No.4.


Ms. Tejas, Kapre, AGP for respondents-State.
                                 ——————

                                  Coram :      Madhav J. Jamdar &
                                               Pravin S. Patil, JJ.

                                  Date     :   March 18, 2026.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER PRAVIN S. PATIL, J) :

1.    The present Petition challenges the notice dated 3rd December

2025 issued by the Chairman and Secretary, Agricultural Produce Market

Committee, Kolhapur, whereby the Petitioner has been informed that his

licence to operate as a Tolaidar (Weighman) shall stand terminated on his

attaining the age of 58 years.

2.    It is the submission of the Petitioner that the criteria of age


adn                               1 of 4
                                                     905-WP-13200-2025

prescribed under the bye-laws of the Society cannot be made applicable

to him, as he is governed by the Maharashtra Mathadi, Hamal and Other

Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1969.

3.    The Petitioner has also relied upon the judgments delivered by this

Court at Nagpur in Civil Writ Petition No. 6343 of 2013 (Harishkumar

Ramanlal Oza v. State of Maharashtra) and at Aurangabad in Writ

Petition No. 5709 of 2017 (Yashwant Kashinath Aajbe v. State of

Maharashtra), wherein an identical issue has been considered. It has

been held that the age limit of 58 years prescribed by the APMC for

continuation or issuance of licence can be reconsidered, subject to

production of a fitness certificate issued by a registered Medical

Practitioner certifying that the concerned member is physically and

mentally fit to continue as a Weighman.

4.    Mr. Chavan, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 4, has strongly

opposed the Petition. According to him, the bye-laws specifically provide

that a licence holder can continue only up to the age of 58 years. He

submits that the said bye-laws are framed in accordance with the

provisions   of   the   Maharashtra   Agriculatral   Produce   Marketing

(Regulation) Act, 1963 and are duly approved by the District Deputy

Registrar, and therefore, are binding. According to him, the action taken

by the Respondents is legal and proper.


adn                              2 of 4
                                                                905-WP-13200-2025

5.    Upon hearing both sides, it is evident that the view taken by this

Court in the aforesaid judgments continues to hold the field. The said

judgments have attained finality and have been implemented by the

respective APMCs.

6.    In the circumstances, paragraph 7 of the judgment in Writ Petition

No. 6343 of 2013 would be relevant to refer in the present matter.

          “7.This court though has noted in the order dated 30-9-2014
          that the clarification has to be required as regards the fitness
          certificate to be in appropriate proforma, till this date there is no
          response from the respondents so as to report compliance.
          Hence, we deem it appropriate to clarify based on the rival
          submissions that a fitness certificate from the registered Medical
          Practitioner certifying that the members of the petitioner
          association who are holding licences of Weighman issued by the
          A.P.M.C. are physically and mentally fit to discharge such duty,
          will be sufficient to consider the claim of such candidates who
          have completed the age of 58 years, by the A.P.M.C. for
          continuation or issuance of licence.”

7.    In view of the above, the Petitioner, who is otherwise eligible for

continuation of the licence, is permitted to continue subject to the

condition that he produce a fitness certificate issued by a registered

Medical Practitioner certifying that he is physically and mentally fit to

discharge the duties of a Weighman and consequently the impugned

notice dated 3rd December 2025 is hereby quashed and set aside.

8.    The Respondents are directed to consider the Petitioner’s

application for renewal/continuation of licence on furnishing medical

certificate, within a period of 30 days. .



adn                                    3 of 4
                                               905-WP-13200-2025

9.     The Writ Petition stands disposed of.


[Pravin S. Patil, J.]                          [Madhav J. Jamdar, J.]




adn                               4 of 4