Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
V.KAMESWAR RAO
Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
V. Kameswar Rao, J. This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:
"The Petitioner, therefore, prays that in the facts and circumstances of the present case this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
a) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Impugned Suspension Order dated June 07, 2021, Number F.No. II/21022/58(855)/2016- FCRA (MU} passed by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, Foreigners Division [ FCRA Monitoring Unit], Ministry of Home Affairs under Section 13 of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, 2010.
b) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. It is the case of the petitioner, being Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (hereinafter, 'CHRI') that it is an independent, non-profit, civil society organisation, headquartered in New Delhi, India since 1993, working to promote access to justice, access to information and timely fulfilment of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in India and in Commonwealth countries. The petitioner was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 o
The court upheld the suspension of the FCRA registration under Section 13, ruling that no prior inquiry or hearing is required, affirming the necessity of statutory compliance over natural justice.
Point of law : By the time suspension order was passed, the Central Government had neither issued any notice of hearing / Show Cause notice in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 14 nor had it initia....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of following due process, including issuing a show cause notice under Section 14, before directing suspension of the FCRA certificate....
The requirement for a personal hearing before the cancellation of registration under the FCRA is essential when the consequences are severe, as outlined in Section 14(2) of the Act.
Compounding a violation under the FCRA Act rectifies the applicant's status, and vague basis for rejection violates principles of natural justice.
An appeal under Section 31(2) of the FCRA, 2010 is maintainable against the rejection of a renewal application, emphasizing the necessity for clear reasoning in rejection orders.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
