THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Kalyan Rai Surana, J.
General Secretary Mantri Assam Rastrabhasa Prasar Samity, Rupnagar, GHY-32, Dist-Kamrup Metro - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Assam And Ors. - Respondent
WP(C) No. 4753 of 2013
Decided On : 18-04-2024
Societies Registration Act - Cancellation of Registration - Sections 4B, 3B, 3C, 3D, 4A, 4B, and 5A
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a charitable educational institution, challenged the cancellation of its registration under the Societies Registration Act. The petitioner alleged lack of opportunity to participate in the proceedings leading to the cancellation.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that notice of hearing was served on the petitioner and both sides were heard. The court emphasized the requirements of the Societies Registration Act and allowed the petitioner to apply for fresh registration by complying with the specified provisions.
Issues: Cancellation of registration, compliance with Societies Registration Act provisions
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of compliance with the provisions of the Societies Registration Act and allowed the petitioner to apply for fresh registration by fulfilling the requirements specified in the Act.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of, allowing the petitioner to apply for fresh registration by complying with the relevant provisions of the Societies Registration Act.
2. We take note of the submissions recorded in the order dated 04.01.2024 that the counsel holding the brief had expired. Although on that date, the matter was adjourned to enable the petitioner to engage a new set of counsel, none appears on call for the petitioner.
3. We have heard Mr. R. Borpujari, learned standing counsel for the Finance Department, respondent nos.1 and 5; and Ms. U. Das, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for respondent nos.2. None appears on call for the respondent nos.3 and 4.
4. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 08.07.2013, passed by the Registrar of Firms and Societies, Assam, thereby cancelling the renewal of registration of the petitioner society and transmission of the order to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), Guwahati for prosecuting the petitioner society.
5. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner society is a charitable educational institution, registered under the Societies Registration Act. It has running its affairs without any financial assistance or grant from either the Central Govt. or from State Govt. It is projected that by order dated 26.12.2012, passed in WP(C) 45/2010, which was filed by respondent nos.3 and 4, this Court had permitted the writ petitions in the said WP(C) 45/2010 to submit a representation along with supporting documents to the Registrar of Firms and Societies, Assam and the said authority was directed to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. In this writ petition, it is projected that the Registrar of Firms and Societies, Assam, without granting any opportunity to the present petitioner to participate in the proceedings, passed the impugned order dated 08.07.2013, cancelling the renewal of registration of the petitioner and the matter was forwarded to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), Guwahati for taking necessary action as per Sections 4(B)(2) and 5(A)(3) of the Societies Registration Act.
6. The learned Govt. Advocate has submitted that as per the impugned order dated 08.07.2013, opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioners, thereafter, final order was passed. It is further submitted that as per the amended provision of Societies Registration Act, 1860, every society is required to apply for renewal as the validity of the certificate is for 3 (three) years and that every registered society is required to submit documents relating to changes in the managing body and to maintain books of account to have it audited and to forward the balance-sheet and auditor’s report to the Registrar of Firms and Societies, Assam.
7. On a perusal of the order dated 08.07.2013, it is evident that notice of hearing was served on the petitioner and that both sides were heard on 16.11.2012 and the statement of the concerned persons from the petitioner society was also recorded.
8. It would be relevant to quote the provisions of Section 4A and 4B of the Societies Registration Act, which were brought in vide Assam Act 11 of 1952, w.e.f. 15.10.1952; Act 7 of 1957, w.e.f. 17.07.1957; and Assam Act 13 of 1967, w.e.f. 18.08.1967:
Assam.-(i) After section 4, insert the following sections, namely:-
"4A. Changes in managing body and rules to be filed.- (1) Together with the list there shall be sent to the Registrar of Societies a statement mentioned in section 4, showing changes during the year to which the list relates in the personnel of the governors, council, directors, committee or other governing body to whom the management of the affairs of the Society is entrusted and also a copy of the rules of the society corrected up- to- date and certified to be a correct copy by not less than three of the members of the governing body.
(2) A copy of ever alteration made in the rules of the society, certified to be a correct copy by not less than three members of the governing body, shall be sent to the Registrar of Societies withi
Compliance with the provisions of the Societies Registration Act is crucial for the registration and renewal of societies.
Mandamus issued directing consideration of society registration renewal on merits upon statutory dues payment.
The court emphasized the importance of the petitioners submitting a detailed representation to the authority and granted an opportunity for a hearing and decision within a specified timeframe.
A statutory authority is duty-bound to process an application for renewal of registration and cannot indefinitely withhold such action merely due to the pendency of complaints, provided it adheres to....
Authority issuing remand order to subordinate for fresh adjudication after hearing becomes functus officio and cannot review or recall it on later representation.
The court emphasized the necessity for reasoned decisions in administrative orders, particularly regarding compliance with statutory requirements.
Registrar becomes functus officio after remanding matter to Deputy Registrar for fresh decision post-hearing and cannot review or recall the order, especially after court reliance leading to writ dis....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.