IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that a writ petition under Article 226 cannot be maintained without the inclusion of all necessary parties, and that the Registrar of Firms and Societies lacks the statutory authority to conduct or supervise general body meetings of a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860.

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. T.T. Tara, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate, representing all the respondents.

2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, amongst others, the petitioners are praying for (i) issuance of a direction upon the Registrar of Firms and Societies (respondent no. 2) to exercise its power under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 to conduct General Body Meeting of the Hindustani Panchayati Thakurbari & Kali Mandir Samiti under the adhoc committee; (ii) to direct the respondent no. 2 to restrain the dissolved Executive Committee of the aforesaid society to give effect to its paper publication announcing to conduct the general body meeting; (iii) to direct the respondent no. 2 to act against the dissolved executive members of the said society; (iv) to direct the respondent authorities to dispose of a series of representations submitted by the petitioners.

Issue of non- joinder of necessary parties:

3. The two writ petitioners herein are (1) Radheshyam Choudhary and (2) Satrughan Kanu. Three respondents have been impleaded in this writ petition, namely, (1) The State of Assam, represented by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Finance Department; (2) The Registrar of Firms and Societies, Assam; and (3) The Deputy Commissioner Jorhat.

4. When the issue of non-joinder of necessary parties was raised by the learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate, the learned counsel for the petitioner had contested the point by submitting that no other persons are either proper or necessary parties in this writ petition because the petitioners are seeking mandamus only against the respondent no. 2. By making reference to the case of Marbury v. Madison, 2 L Ed 60, it was submitted that the High Court’s power to issue prerogative writs would not be dependent on parties but it could issue writs upon the statutory authorities who have failed to discharge their duties. It is submitted that the respondent no. 2 was having power to ensure that the executive committee of the society is lawfully constituted and functioning.

5. The copy of the cited judgment was not placed for the perusal of the Court. However, with a caveat that memory, at times, is fallible, it may be stated that the case of Marbury v. Madison (supra), is perhaps on the power of the writ courts in respect of judicial review wherein it is perhaps held that all State actions, including legislation, had to conform to the Rule of Law and that the said case was decided in the backdrop of the legal position of England, where there is no written Constitution. In this case, the petitioners have not been able to show that any action of the respondent no. 2 was contrary to the Rule of Law. It is made clear that the Court has discussed the case of Marbury v. Madison (supra) from memory, which is likely to be fallible and therefore, observations made in this paragraph is not to be construed as an authoritative comment on the ratio of the cited foreign case. Hence, if the memory of the Court is found to be not right, the observations made in this paragraph may be just ignored by the readers.

6. The prayers made in this writ petition are briefly referred to herein before. In the considered opinion of the Court, none of the prayers can be allowed in the absence of proper and necessary parties. No materials have been annexed to the writ petition to show that the earlier Executive Committee was dissolved in a lawful manner; or that the “so called” adhoc Committee was constituted in a lawful manner. Therefore, prayer no. 1 cannot be allowed without hearing the members of the society, who are not before us.

7. The second prayer is to direct the respondent no 2 to restrain the dissolved Executive Committee to conduct general meeting. The third prayer is to act against the “so called” dissolved executive committee. Neither the members of the society nor the members of the “so called” dissolv