' Anjuman Arhtian (Regd.), Khanpur, District Rahimyar Khan, the petitioner is a representative body, has filed this constitutional petition to the effect that the proceedings taken by respondents Nos. 1 to 4 and the selection of respondents Nos. 5 to 21 as members of the Market Committee, Khanpur, as notified vide Notification No, PD/XV-2/84 issued on behalf of the Government of Punjab, Agricultural Department under the signature of the Secretary to the Government of the Punjab, Agricultural Department dated 23/27-9-1989 with regard to the constitution of the Market Committee, Khanpur, be declared illegal, void, without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The petitioner has also prayed an interim relief for staying the election of the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Market Committee, Khanpur, scheduled to be held tomorrow.
2. The brief facts of this case are that the Market Committee has been constituted under section 8 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Ordinance, 1978 (which shall hereinafter be referred as an Ordinance). The Market Committee consists of 17 members. One of them was to be appointed by the Government from the employees of the Agricultural Department. The remaining members were to be appointed by the Government out of a panel of names recommended by the Zila Council equal to twice the members of vacancies to be filled in the manner provided by law. Nine members were to be taken from the growers of the notified market area concerned. Five members were to be taken from the licensees under section 6 and one person was to be taken from the persons licensed under section 9.
' It may be noted that under section 6, the licensed commission agents were to be taken whereas section 9 deals with the licensed weighmen, brokers or Pallaydars from the notified market area and one member was to be taken from the consumers resident within the area of notified market concerned, who is not a dealer or a grower.
3. It has been asserted in this petition that the provisions of section 8 of the Ordinance have not been complied with and those persons licensed under section 6 of the Ordinance have not been considered except only one person, the names of whom were sent by the petitioner to the Zila Council, Rahimyar Khan. According to this petition, it was incumbent on the Zila Council to have selected the names of the persons, which were sent by the petitioner and this mandatory provision had been violated by respondents Nos. 1 to 4. It has also been added that certain persons, who were not the licensees of the notified area of the Market Committee, were also taken and Dr. Muhammad Akbar Malik, who was a practising doctor, has been notified as a grower. It has been stated in this petition that the employee of the Agricultural Department was not consulted according to law and, therefore, the selection of respondents Nos. 5 to 21 may be declared illegal, void, without lawful authority and of no legal effect. Resultantly, it has been prayed that the election of the Chairman and the Vice Chairman of the Market Committee, Khanpur, scheduled to be held tomorrow on 19-10-1989 may be stayed.
4. Section 8 of the Ordinance and Rule 9 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets (General)
Rules, 1979, (which shall hereinafter be referred as Rules) may be reproduced as under:-- "S.8:--Constitution of the market committee:
(1) A market committee shall consist of ten or seventeen members as Government may in each case determine.
(2) Of these members one may be appointed by Government from amongst the employees of the Agricultural Department.
(3) The remaining members shall be appointed by Government out of a panel of names recommended by Zila Council equal to twice the number of vacancies to be filled in the manner provided hereunder, that is to say:-
(a) if the committee is to consist of ten members, there shall be appointed-
(i) five members from growers of the notified market area concerned; and
(ii) two members from persons licensed under section 6 and one member from persons licensed under section 9 and working as a weighman, broker or palledar in the notified market area concerned; and
(iii) one member from amongst the consumers resident in the notified market area concerned who is not a dealer or a grower.
(b) If the committee is to consist of seventeen members, there shall be appointed:--
(i) nine members from growers of the notified market area concerned;
(ii) five members from persons licensed under section 6 and one member from persons licensed under section 9 and working as a weighman, broker or palledar from the notified market area concerned; and
(iii) one member from amongst the consumers resident in the notified market area concerned who is not a dealer or a grower.
(4) If any question arises as to whether any person is or is not a grower for the purposes of this Ordinance, the decision of the Zila Council shall be final.
(5) Not more than one person related to each other as father, son, brother, uncle, brother-in-law, son-in-law and their ascendants and descendants shall be appointed as a member of the same market committee.
(6) No person shall be appointed as a member of a market committee for two consecutive terms.
(7) No act done by a market committee shall be called in question on the ground merely of the existence of any vacancy, or any defect in the constitution of the market committee."
Rule-9:- (1) A notification under section 7 of the Ordinance shall determine the numerical strength of the members of the market committee to be constituted.
(2) For the purpose of constituting a market committee, the Secretary to the Government of the Punjab, Agricultural Department shall fix and notify a date by which panels of growers, consumers and licencees under sections 6 and 9 of the Ordinance respectively shall be submitted by the Zila Council to the Government.
(3) The Zila Council shall consult in writing the Extra Assistant Director of Agriculture (Economics and Marketing) and also the associations of growers, consumers and licensees, if any, existing within the notified market area, in obtaining the names which may form the panel for the selection of the members of the market committee:
(4) The Zila Council shall submit his recommendations in the matter as provided under section 8 of the Ordinance to the Government for appointment of members of the Market Committee by the date fixed in the notification by the Secretary to the Government of the Punjab Agriculture Department.
(5) Government shall, after such enquiry, as it may deem proper, select and notify the names of the members appointed. Provided that if the Government do not accept the recommendations made by the Zila Council as a whole or in part, it shall ask the Zila Council to submit fresh names or panel of names, as the case may be, in the manner provided above.
(6) The notification issued under sub-rule (5) shall specify the date from which market committee is to function. This information, besides being communicated to the members appointed, shall be notified to the public by exhibiting a copy in the office of the market committee, or if there be no such office, at some conspicuous place within the notified market area, to be selected by the Zila Council."
5. The cardinal objection of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the members have not been taken from the panel of names sent by the petitioner. It may be noted that the petitioner has not placed on the file the panel of names sent by them. The plea taken by them is that they could not bring a copy of the panel of names on account of the strike of the clerks. Since there is nothing on the file to show the panel of names sent by them, we cannot accept the plea that the names were not sent from that panel.
6. It was represented that it was imperative on the Zila Council to have selected the persons from the panel of names sent by the petitioner but the other persons have mostly been selected ignoring the recommendation of the petitioner. In Rule 8 of the Agricultural Produce Markets Rules, 1940, the Deputy Commissioner was duty bound to submit his recommendation to the Government for the appointment of the members of the market committee after the receipt of the panel of names for appointment of the members of the market committee. In Para-6 of these rules, the word is "shale' and the Deputy Commissioner was duty bound to send the names as recommended by the petitioner. But in the rules framed in 1979, this word "shall" has been converted into "may" and this being so, it was not incumbent upon Zila Council to recommend the persons from the panel of names sent by the petitioner and it was optional. It appears that the licensees under sections 6 and 9 of the Ordinance should have been taken and not necessarily the names of the persons, which were recommended by the petitioner.
' Section 11 of the Ordinance reads as under:-- "S.11. Removal of members.--The Government may at any time, by notification, remove any member if such member has, in their opinion, been guilty of misconduct or neglect of duty or has been wrongly or improperly appointed or has lost the qualification on the strength of which he was appointed or whose continuance as a member in the opinion of Government is not desirable."
7. It has been suggested in this section that the petitioner had an appropriate remedy to apply to the Government against the wrongly or improperly appointed members of the Market Committee.
In accordance with the precedent cited as Ch. Muhammad Sadiq v. Muhammad Nawaz and 2 others 1980 CLC 952, it has been adjudicated that where an alternative remedy has been provided under a special statute, it should be taken as adequate unless extraordinary circumstances are shown to the contrary. It was a case under the Punajb Local Government Ordinance (VI of 1979) and the principle enunciated therein can safely be extended to the facts of the instant case. The petitioner is well advised to approach the Government for this purpose and the constitutional petition is not maintainable.
8. In the circumstances, it is not advisable to stay the election of the Chairman and the Vice- Chairman of the Market Committee scheduled on 19-10-1989. In Sh. Muhammad Hussain v. Malik Karam Dad Khan, Controlling Authority and Deputy Commissioner, Lyallpur and others 1971 SCM R 535, the election proceedings were not vitiated simply because the person, who was not qualified to be a member participated in the proceedings. I, therefore, decline to grant this relief to the petitioner. The writ petition has no merit and stands dismissed in limine.