The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of 'undesirable' under Section 3A of the Societies Registration Act, emphasizing the specific factors to be considered in determining the undesirability of a name and ruling out a general notion of what is desirable and undesirable.

This writ petition was heard earlier and was reserved for orders today.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of parties. The learned A.G.P. waives service for the respondents.

3. By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the order passed by the 2nd respondent on 4th June, 2012. By that order the application made on behalf of the petitioner/original applicant has been rejected.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that along with others, who are all advocates duly enrolled with the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa and practicing in this Court, filed an application with the 2nd respondent seeking registration of an Association as a Society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

5. It was their case that they wanted to register an association of advocates called "Bombay Lawyers' Association".

6. This application was made on 21st April, 2012 together with the information that is required to be supplied, namely, aims and objects of the Association, the memorandum of Association with the signatures of the subscribers, and the rules and regulations of the Association. The association was constituted on 14th April, 2012

7. On this application, a hearing was scheduled on 4th June, 2012 which was attended by the petitioner and another representative/ founder member. At this hearing, the petitioner was informed that there is an objection and such an Association cannot be registered. The attention of the representative was invited to Section 3A of the Act. The petitioner submitted a written submission, copy of which is at Annexure-B to the writ petition, pointing out that there is nothing undesirable about the activities and the aims of the Association. It is not as if the petitioner seeks anything which is contravening the status of a statutory body, namely, the Bar Council of India and Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa. If the main object of the Association is welfare of lawyer community and that is the reason why the application for registration was filed, then, the petitioner submitted that the same deserves consideration and the registration be granted. Reliance was placed on Article 19(1)(C) of the Constitution of India in this behalf. It appears that, on 4th June, 2012, the order was passed by the Assistant Registrar and his reasons for refusal of the registration are as under :-

"7. The following aspects are apparent in the present matter:-

(a) The name is undesirable due to the identical name with the already functioning associations of the advocates and lawyers including Bar Council of India, Maharashtra and Goa that too with the prefix of "Bombay" i.e. earlier name of city of "Mumbai".

(b) The name is identical with the name of body constituted by virtue of the provisions of Advocates Act, 1961 i.e. Bar Council of India, Maharashtra and Goa and also nearly resembles with the Bar Association of Mumbai Courts.

(c) The members of the various Bar Associations of Mumbai Courts and Tribunals established with due permission of the concerned authorities and the members of Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa and members of Bar Council of India or the members of the present proposed society are likely to be deceived by the name of the present proposed society.

(d) Even the objects incorporated in the present proposed society are very nearly resembling the functioning of the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, Bar Council of India and various Bar Associations of the Advocates in the city of Mumbai.

(di) When there is a body established by virtue of the laws and rules of Advocates Act, 1961 covering the functions and welfare of the advocates, the registration of the proposed society is undesirable, unless specific or special sanction to the same, which is not filed on the present record and proceedings."

"8. The applicant took shelter of the Article 19-C of the Constitution of India and stressfully