R.K. DESHPANDE, J.

1. Rule. The learned counsels appearing for the parties waive service of notice. The petition is being finally disposed of.

2. The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 4-10-2017 passed by the Assistant Registrar of Societies, Nagpur, rejecting Application No.615 of 2017 for grant of permission to register a charitable society under the name and style of “Rashtriya Swayansevak Sangh” along with the Memorandum of Association, Rules and Regulations and other relevant documents enclosed with it. The application was opposed by the respondent Nos.3 to 6, who were the objectors, claiming that the society under the name and style of “Rashtriya Swayansevak Sangh” has already been registered at Chandrapur vide Registration No.MH-08/D0018394 by the Indian Government since 1925 and they are the members of such society. According to the objectors, the petitioner cannot claim registration of the society under the name and style of “Rashtriya Swayansevak Sangh” in view of the bar created under Section 3-A of the Societies Registration Act, 1860.

3. The Assistant Registrar, in the impugned order, has recorded the finding that there is no documentary evidence in the form of registration certificate filed by the objectors on record to prove that the society under the name and style of “Rashtriya Swayansevak Sangh” or similar or identical to it, has already been registered. Relying upon the Circular dated 22-12-2005 issued by the General Administration Department of the State Government bearing No.EMB-1005/1440/30, it is held that the Circular impliedly prohibits the use of name “Rashtriya” in the name of society. The order holds that the true spirit of the Circular is to prevent the name of society or trust, which will directly or by implication suggests the patronage of the Government of India or the State Government. It holds that to register the petitionersociety containing the name “Rashtriya”, is against such Circular. It also holds that the registration of the petitionersociety is also barred by Section 3-A of the Societies Registration Act in the absence of prior permission of the Government.

4. It is urged by Shri Ingole, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that in the absence of existence of any society being already registered in the name of “Rashtriya Swayansevak Sangh”, the learned Assistant Registrar has committed an error in rejecting the application. He has further urged that there is no basis to form an opinion that the registration of the society in the name of “Rashtriya Swayansevak Sangh” is undesirable either on the ground that the name is identical with, or resembles with any society previously registered, or that it suggests or is calculated to suggest the patronage of the Government or connection with any body constituted by the Government or any local authority. The reliance is placed upon the decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Satyaprakash Sharma v. State of Maharashtra and another, reported in 2013(1) Mh.L.J. 147.

5. As against the aforesaid contentions, Shri Sunil Manohar, the learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri S.D. Abhyankar, Advocate, appearing for the respondent Nos.4 and 5, the objectors, has urged that the provision of Section 3-A of the Societies Registration Act is wide enough to include the power of the Registrar to reject the application for registration of the society in any particular name if it is found to be otherwise undesirable, though not even referable to categories 1 and 2 under Section 3-A of the said Act. He submits that the decision of the learned Single Judge relied upon has to be understood in the facts of the case before the Court.

6. According to Shri Anand Deshpande, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 2, the word “Rashtriya” shows the patronage of the Government, which definitely creates confusion or it may mislead the public. He supports the order and relies up