Elections must adhere to procedural compliance; improperly ratified amendments render elections invalid, reinforcing the necessity for integrity in electoral processes and governance.

JUDGMENT :

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.

1. Leave Granted.

2. The present appeals are arising out of the two impugned orders dated 27.02.2024 and 12.04.2024 by which Madras High Court (“hereinafter High Court”) declared re-election of all the office bearers since it was held that the electoral college itself was flawed and appointed committee of administrators to conduct re-elections. Furthermore, the High Court held that the amendments to the bye-laws had not been carried out in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the Constitution of Church of South India (“hereinafter CSI”) and it was held that the Special Meeting of the Synod held on 7th and 8th March 2022 was not duly convened.

3. The history of litigation goes back to the filing of the four civil suits under Order IV Rule 1 of the ORIGINAL SIDE RULES and Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“hereinafter CPC”) along with interim applications seeking interim reliefs. The learned Single Bench passed various orders in the interim applications which were challenged before the learned Division Bench and the aforesaid impugned orders were passed.

4. The aforesaid suits relate to the management and administration of the CSI, an un-registered body of persons which is in-charge of the functions of the protestant Churches in Southern India and in Sri Lanka. This un-registered body of persons christened as CSI came into existence on the 27th September 1947 and it is governed by a set of Rules that is called the Constitution of the CSI.

5. Disputes often arise regarding the management and conduct of the elections for various posts of Office Bearers in the CSI and its other organizations called Church of South India Trust Association. While CSI looks after the ecclesiastical functions, the Church of South India Trust Association, which is a Company registered under Section 8 of the COMPANIES ACT , 2013 ( Section 25 of the COMPANIES ACT , 1956) takes care of the secular functions and administration of the properties. All the properties of the Church vest in the Church of South India Trust Association.

FACTUAL MATRIX

6. The facts leading to the institution of the aforesaid suits – the plaintiffs who are six in number are the members of the Church for a considerably long period as claimed by them. Furthermore, it is contended that plaintiffs had held certain crucial positions in the management of the CSI in the past. Dispute arose when the 3rd defendant in the suit, Most Rev. Dharmaraj Rasalam, was elected as a Moderator in the election held on 11.10.2020 for the three years period ending on 11.10.2023. The plaintiffs contended that the 3rd defendant is accused of several criminal offences and almost ten FIRs are pending against him on the date of his nomination as the Moderator.

7. Subsequently, the first suit C.S. No. 86 of 2022 came to be filed on 03.01.2022 fundamentally contending that a scheme be framed to set out the conditions for the appointment, terms of office. They further stated that Constitution of the CSI does not prescribe any qualification or dis-qualification for the post of Moderator which has led to persons with criminal antecedents to participate in the elections and occupy the post of the Moderator, which according to the plaintiffs, is the most powerful post in the CSI. The plaintiffs in the C.S. No. 86 of 2022 prayed for the following reliefs:

a. Frame a scheme under Sections 92(g) and (h) of the Code, setting out the conditions for appointment and terms of office and prescribing disqualification for the members of the Synod of the 1st defendant.

b. Removing the 3rd defendant from the office of Moderator of the Church of South India, the 1st defendant herein,

c. Con