VIPIN SANGHI, J.

1. The petitioner assails the order dated 04.02.2011 passed by the Registrar of Societies (Registrar, for short) whereby the registration of the society, of whom the petitioner is the Secretary, stands cancelled. The petitioner also seeks a mandamus for restoration of the Society’s registration No.62867/2008.

2. The case of the petitioner is that in the year 2000, the petitioner along with other like minded persons, who are followers of “Baba Goga Medi” formed an association and gave it the name “Delhi Dharmik Sewa Sangh Goga Medi Rajasthan”, having its office at 16/33, East Punjabi Bagh, Delhi. After the formation of the said association, steps were taken for getting the same registered under the Societies Registration Act. The President of the society gave affidavits in terms of the guidelines framed by the respondent, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, at the time of formation of the society. The format of the affidavit required to be submitted by the promoter members reads as follows:-

“I, ……………………….s/o………….. Resident of ……………….. do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-

(1) That I am the President/Secretary of the Society named……………………………………

(2) That the desirous persons of the Society are not related to each other by way of blood relation or otherwise.

(3) That the name of proposed Society is not identical or reassembles to any other registered/non-registered Society in our locality as per my knowledge.

(4) That if name of this Society is found attracting the provision of Emblems Act of 1950 and/or identical and resembles closely to any other Society which is already registered under Societies Registration Act of 1860 in the NCT of Delhi and other law of land applicable to them then registration granted shall be deemed to have been withdrawn if the Society fail to change the name within the given time do so Registrar of Societies, Delhi.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

Verified at Delhi, on this the……….. day of …….. 200… that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT”

(emphasis supplied)

3. As would be seen from the aforesaid format, the President was required to, inter alia, state that the desirous persons of the Society are not related to each other by way of blood relation or otherwise. It is admitted that two of the promoter members, namely, Sh. Chandra Bhan Gupta and Sh. Brij Mohan Gupta, the Petitioner herein, are father and son respectively. The society was duly registered by the Registrar of Societies, Respondent no.1 herein, and the aforesaid registration number was granted to it.

4. It appears that respondents No.2 to 6 made a complaint to the Registrar, complaining that false affidavits had been sworn by the President of the Society to the effect that the desirous members are not related to each other. Acting on the said complaint dated 20.05.2010, the Registrar issued a notice dated 02.06.2010 calling upon the society to show cause as to why their registration should not be cancelled.

5. The Registrar proceeded to cancel the registration of the Society on the ground that a false affidavit had been filed to the effect that the desirous persons of the Society are not related to each other by blood relation, whereas two members, viz. Sh. Chandra Bhan Gupta and Sh. Brij Mohan Gupta – the Petitioner, were related to each other by blood, being father and son. The Registrar invoked Section 21 of the General Clauses Act to cancel the registration of the society. Consequently, the present petition has been preferred.

6. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no statutory bar to the desirous members/promoter members being related to each other by blood, or otherwise. He submits that the guidelines framed by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi, and sought to be invoked against the society are non-statutory and non-binding. He further submits that the deponent of the affidavit