IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the need to establish jurisdiction before adjudicating on the merits of a case, as per the position of law regarding the maintainability of a writ against private entities.

ORDER

Chandra Dhari Singh, J. (Oral)

CM APPL. 16147/2024 & CM APPL. 13790/2024 in W.P.(C) 6243/2023

1. The application bearing no. 16147/2024 has been filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking the following reliefs:

"a) Pass an Ad-Interim order, direction restraining the implementation enforcement or operation of Rule 86 of the supplementary bye-laws of the Respondent No.2, in the forthcoming elections to be held on 07 April 2024.

b) Pass an Ad-Interim order, direction restraining Respondent No 2, from following the procedure of adding votes cast by the Mumbai Region members who are not enrolled in Delhi Region, to declare the winner at Delhi Region Central Council Member, exclusively reserved for the Members of the Region and vis-e-versa.

c) Direct Respondent No 2, to hold elections in strict compliance of its Rules 85 Regulations..

d) Pass any other order, directions which this Hon'ble Court deems fit 85 proper and to uphold the interest of justice, in the conduct of the forthcoming elections to be held on 07 April 2024."

2. The captioned writ petition in which the instant applications have been filed is related to the issue of mode of election of the office bearers of the respondent no. 2 (`respondent Club' hereinafter) which is a society bearing no. 394/1949-50 registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860.

3. The respondent Club was provided with a land admeasuring 8.3 acres by the Union of India in New Delhi and a lease dated 27th June, 1956 was executed for the same.

4. In the year 2023, the Executive Committee of the respondent Club passed a resolution dated 11th February, 2023 for elections of the respondent Club and it was resolved that the elections of both the regions, i.e. Delhi and Mumbai shall happen simultaneously.

5. Thereafter, the election notification dated 14th February, 2023, was published, whereby, various Rules and Regulations governing the club were notified. Aggrieved by the alleged introduction of one particular rule, i.e. Rule 86, the petitioner sent a query vide various emails and subsequently filed an application before the respondent No. 1 (`respondent Registrar' hereinafter) for inspection of the bye-laws of the respondent Club, however, the said inspection could not be carried out as the file of the respondent Club was untraceable at the office of the respondent Registrar.

6. Pursuant to non-inspection by the respondent Registrar, the petitioner preferred an RTI application seeking all the records related to the respondent Club. In regard to the same, it is alleged by the petitioner that despite filing of the above said application, the complete records related to amendment to the bye-laws were still not shared.

7. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred the captioned writ petition.

8. During the pendency of the above said petition, the petitioner filed an application bearing no. 16147/2024 seeking non-implementation of Rule 86 of the supplementary bye-laws in the forthcoming elections to be held on 7th April, 2024. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred another application bearing no. 13790/2024 praying for early hearing of the other application and both the applications are listed today.

9. Before arguing the issue of grant of interim relief on merits qua Rule 86, the learned senior counsel Mr.Tiku, appearing on behalf of the respondent Club raised serious objections to the maintainability of the captioned writ petition and advanced the following arguments with regard to the same.

10. Learned senior counsel submitted that the present petition is nothing but a gross misuse of the process of law as the remedy of issuance of a writ against the respondent Club is not available since the Club is a private entity and does not fall within the definition of a State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.

11. It is submitted that a suitable and efficacious remedy is available with the petitioner for ventilation of his alleged grievance, however, the petitioner conv