The petitioner's standing to raise issues already covered by previous court orders and the procedural requirements for declaring a society defunct under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975.

Heard both sides. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition, seeking for a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to initiate necessary and appropriate proceedings against the fourth respondent Society, i.e. Arcot Lutheran Church Society, by conducting an inspection and enquiry into the affairs of the Society and also to appoint a Special Officer to administer the affairs of the society until it is revived.

2. When the matter came up on 29.10.2009, the petitioner was directed to give private notice to respondents 4 to 10. On behalf of fourth respondent, a counter affidavit, dated 30.11.2009 was filed together with a typed set of papers.

3. The petitioner claims to be the member of R-4 Society. According to him, the Society was registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. The by-laws of the society provides for conducting elections and procedures for conduct of elections. It is stated that the society did not submit proper annual report to the Registrar of Societies. Therefore, the District Registrar, Cuddalore initiated action under Section 44 (3) of the Societies Act and forwarded his report to the State Government. It was also stated that the Society was declared to be defunct by a notification issued in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette on 5.9.2001 in terms of Section 44 of the Societies Act. Therefore, this led to filing of some writ petitions before this court. There was maladministration and an attempt to alienate the properties of the society was also done. Various acts and omissions of the office bearers were also registered. It is under these circumstances, power under Section 36 of the Societies Act was sought to be pressed into service.

4. Though when the matter came up on 08.12.2009, all the connected writ petitions were directed to be posted, it was subsequently informed that all these matters have already been disposed of by this court.

5. On behalf of the official respondents, a communication sent by the second respondent Inspector General of Registration, dated 19.10.2005 to the members of the society was produced. In that communication, the second respondent had listed out various writ petitions, which were filed before this court and finally, stated that since the society has been functioning as per the order of this court, various grievances made by the members can be taken up only after disposal of those writ petitions. Therefore, it was submitted that the petitioner has come with one more writ petition, which need not be entertained.

6. On behalf of fourth respondent Society, in their counter affidavit, dated 30.11.2009, it was stated that election for the society was conducted pursuant to the order passed by this court, dated 29.8.2002 and under the supervision of an Advocate Commissioner, elections for the remaining period from 2001 to 2004 was conducted after following the procedures. After election was over, one Edison filed W.P.No.15297 of 2003 before this court restraining the office bearers from taking charge. Subsequently, on steps being taken, the order of this court granting injunction was modified and the elected office bearers were permitted to carry on the functions of the society. Finally, W.P.No.15297 of 2003 came to be dismissed for want of prosecution on 8.6.2007. It was stated that the society is functioning in terms of its by-laws. The properties and finance are controlled by the recommending body. It is the Church Board ultimately will have to decide the sale of the properties. The allegation of malpractice was sought to be denied.

7. In support of the stand of the respondents, a judgment of this court in A.Samiappan Vs. District Registrar, Office of the Registrar of Societies, Chennai and others reported in 2007 (4) MLJ 421 was referred to for the proposition that for initiating action under Section 36 of the Societies Act, a requisition will have to be given by the majority of members of the Committee or 1/3rd of the members of the Society shou