The provisions of Section 44(8) of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975, introduced later, cannot be applied retrospectively.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to enforce and implement Sections 36, 37(a), 39, 40, 42 and other provisions of the TamilNadu Societies Registration Act 1975, carry out the procedures provided therein and complete the process of dissolution of the Nehru School Committee Society, Puthanampatti made under Section 44(4) of the said Act within a time frame.)

1. This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to enforce and implement Sections 36, 37(a), 39, 40, 42 and other provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Act, 1975') and carry out the procedures provided therein and complete the process of dissolution of the Nehru School Committee Society, Puthanampatti made under Section 44(4) of the said Act with a time frame.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that his late father Mooka Pillai formed a Society in the name of "The Nehru School Committee" and registered the same as Regn.No.9 of 1947 under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "the Central Act 1860"). Through the said Society, he established a Middle School in the name of Nehru Middle School and subsequently upgraded it as Nehru High School and thereafter upgraded it as Nehru Higher Secondary School. He has also formed a Managing Committee for administering and managing the affairs of the Society and the school. He was running the school with the aid provided by the Government of Tamil Nadu.

3. As per the Rules and Regulations of the Society, the President shall be the Executive Head of the Society, and also the Correspondent as well as the Manager of the School. As the founder of the Society the petitioner's father shall be the President for the Society and the Managing Committee for his life and after his death or resignation, his four sons, including the petitioner and the fourth respondent herein shall be the President each for one year successively in turns or all of them jointly nominate one amongst them as the President.

4. Pursuant to the enactment of the Tamil Nadu Recognized Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Private Schools Act, 1973'), which came into effect on 01.12.1974 the said school was recognized by the authorities and the school was running in accordance with the Private Schools Act. The petitioner has been nominated as the Secretary of the Nehru School Committee and the Managing Committee.

5. Thereafter, the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration, 1975 came into force w.e.f 22.04.1978. In view of Section 53 of the State Act, 1975 the Nehru School Committee Society registered under the Central Act, 1860 was deemed to be registered under the State Act, 1975 and its bye-laws which were not inconsistent with the provisions of the State Act, 1975 are continued in force.

6. At that time, the petitioner's brother and the fourth respondent herein was functioning as the Secretary of the Nehru School Committee Society. Further he has failed to keep proper books of accounts, get it audited and failed to file the required documents before the third respondent within the time stipulated under the State Act, 1975. Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 44(3)(b) of the State Act, 1975, the respondents 2 and 3 have issued a show cause notice to the Nehru School Committee Society. Even thereafter the accounts have not been furnished. Therefore, the first respondent exercising his powers under Section 44(4) of the State Act, 1975, struck off the name of the Nehru School Committee Society from the Register and also published a notice therefor in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 01.01.1992.

7. According to the petitioner, from that date onwards the Nehru School Committee Society was deemed to be dissolved. Even after that, the fourth respondent has not taken any action unde