High Court of Gujarat
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, IDARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH
- Bench
- HEMANT M PRACHCHHAK
Holding
The order cancelling the recruitment process is quashed as it was passed without affording the petitioner a hearing, violating natural justice and constitutional rights.
Summary
The Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC), Idar, conducted a recruitment process for 12 employees through a newspaper advertisement on 16 March 2024. Two candidates, Hemant Nachhabhai Patel and Kiritbhai Chimanbhai Patel, challenged the recruitment as illegal, prompting the Director (respondent No.2) to order an inquiry under Section 44 and subsequently cancel the recruitment and the related resolutions on 17 September 2025. The APMC filed writ petitions under Articles 14, 19 and 226 of the Constitution, contending that the cancellation was effected without affording any hearing, thereby violating natural justice. The High Court, relying on a prior decision in Special Civil Application No. 15833 of 2023, held that the Director’s order was unlawful and quashed it, directing the Director to reconsider the recruitment after hearing all parties, including the objectors, within four months. Consequently, both petitions were allowed and the related civil applications were disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the Director’s cancellation of the recruitment process without a prior hearing violates the principles of natural justice and the constitutional guarantees under Articles 14 and 19.
- Whether the Director had the statutory authority under Section 44 to cancel the recruitment and the resolutions passed by the APMC.
- Whether the impugned order dated 17 September 2025 should be quashed.
Subjects
recruitmentnatural justiceArticle 14Article 19Section 44APMCquash orderwrit petition226 of the Constitution
Judgment
C/SCA/13792/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/05/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13792 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR JOINING PARTY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13792 of 2025
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13820 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR JOINING PARTY) NO. 1 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13820 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, IDAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
SCA NO 13792 OF 2025
MR SHALIN MEHTA SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR DIPAN DESAI(2481)
for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
SCA NO 13820 OF 2025
MR DHAVAL VYAS SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MS JAYINI D THAKORE for
the Petitioner(s) No. 1
SCA NOs 13792 OF 2025 AND 13820 OF 2025
MR G.H. VIRK GOVERNMENT PLEADER WITH MS DHARITRI PANCHOLI
AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
PRACHCHHAK
Date : 04/05/2026
COMMON JUDGMENT
1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr. GH Virk, learned
Government Pleader waives service of notice of rule on behalf of
the respondents.
Page 1 of 4
C/SCA/13792/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/05/2026
2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective
parties, the present petition is taken up for final hearing today.
3. Present petition is filed by the petitioner under Articles 14,
19 and 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned
order dated 17.09.2025 passed by respondent no. 2 – Director
whereby respondent no.2 Director has cancelled the recruitment
process undertaken by the Agricultural Produce Market
Committee (APMC), Idar and cancelled the resolutions passed by
the APMC for appointing 12 employees.
4. Since both the petitions are filed against the same
impugned order, the facts of Special Civil Application No. 13792
of 2025 is considered as a lead matter and both the petitions are
being disposed of by this common judgment.
5. Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that the
petitioner had undertaken a recruitment process by
advertisement dated 16.03.2024 published in JansattaSamachar
for recruitment of 8 clerks and 4 auctioneer clerks. That, after
the recruitment process was concluded, one Hemant Nachhabhai
Patel and one Kiritbhai Chimanbhai Patel challenged the
recruitment process as being illegal. That, the respondent no.2,
vide order dated 07.05.2025 passed an order under section 44 to
conduct an inquiry with regard to the appointments made by the
petitioner. Subsequently, respondent no. 2 Director vide order
dated 17.09.2025 cancelled the recruitment process undertaken
Page 2 of 4
C/SCA/13792/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/05/2026
by the petitioner and cancelled the resolutions passed by the
petitioner for appointing 12 employees. Being aggrieved by the
same, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties
and perused the materials available on record. It appears that
the petitioner had undertaken a recruitment process by
advertisement dated 16.03.2024 published in JansattaSamachar
for recruitment of 8 clerks and 4 auctioneer clerks. It appears
that the recruitment process was challenged on grounds of
illegality and subsequently, respondent no. 2 Director vide order
dated 17.09.2025 cancelled the recruitment process. It appears
that the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity before the
impugned order of cancellation of recruitment process was
passed and the position is not disputed by any parties.
8. Considering the submissions canvassed by both the
parties, the averments made in the present petition and
considering the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
Special Civil Application No. 15833 of 2023 dated 16.10.2023
referred and relied upon by the learned counsels for the
petitioner wherein order was passed in another Agricultural
Produce Market Committee for providing appropriate opportunity
to the concerned petitioner, both the petitions deserve to be
allowed and the impugned order passed by respondent no.2
deserves to be quashed and set aside.
Page 3 of 4
C/SCA/13792/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/05/2026
9. In the result, both the petitions are allowed. The impugned
order dated 17.09.2025 passed by respondent no.2 is quashed
and set aside. The respondent no.2 Director shall consider and
decide the issue relating to the recruitment process and
determine whether any illegality has been committed or not after
hearing the concerned parties and considering the contentions
raised by all the concerned parties as well as the objectors who
have filed the civil applications for joining as party to the
proceedings i.e. applicants namely Hemantbhai Nachchhabhai
Patel and Kiritbhai Chimanbhai Patel are also to be heard before
passing any order. It is open for both the parties to raise all the
legal contentions available under the eye of law before
respondent no.2 and the same shall be considered and decided
by respondent no. 2 in accordance with law and without being
influenced by the order passed in the earlier proceedings, as
expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four
months from the date of receipt of copy of writ of this order. Rule
is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
10. In view of the order passed in the present petitions, the
Civil Applications are disposed of accordingly.
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
ANUSRI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ANUSRI VASU(HC02352), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 07/05/2026 18:39:54
Page 4 of 4
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "recruitment"Sign in to search