BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
M.Jothiraman, J.
Mathew Jebasingh - Petitioner
Versus
The District Registrar (Societies) and ors. - Respondents
W.P.(MD)No.1496 of 2025
Decided On : 17-01-2025
ORDER :
M.Jothiraman, J.
This writ petition has been filed for a Writ of Mandamus seeking to direct the first respondent to instruct the second respondent not to conduct extraordinary General Body Meeting as per the notice, dated 09.01.2025 based on the petitioner's representation, dated 11.01.2025.
2. Mr.P.Subbaraj, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the first respondent and Mr.Ragatheesh Kumar, learned counsel takes notice for the second respondent. With consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is a Secretary of the Mukuperi Pragasapuram India Ega Retchagar Sabai registered in the year 1956. The second respondent is the President of the Society. The second respondent had issued a notice for extraordinary General Body Meeting on 09.01.2025 to be held on 19.01.2025 without following the procedure and rules. As per Section 28 of the Tamil Nadu Registration Act, after the receipt of the requisition in writing from the 25 members, the committee can call for extraordinary meeting, but the second respondent independently is calling for meeting even without issuing 21 days prior notice and without issuing notice to all the members. If the meeting is conducted, it will cause serious problems in the Society administration. The petitioner also submitted a representation, dated 11.01.2025 before the first respondent and the same is pending. Hence, this writ petition.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the second respondent has been acting against the welfare of the society. The second respondent organized the General Body Meeting independently by issuing notice dated 09.01.2025 to be held on 19.01.2025. In the notice, dated 09.01.2025, wherein, it is mentioned as the minutes of the Management committee of the Salaipudur ERS Higher Secondary School to be confirmed. If anybody includes the President organizes General Body Meeting without following the Bye Laws, it will worse affect the functions of the society. To organise the extraordinary General Body Meeting 21 days prior notice is must as per Bye Laws of the Society. The notice contains only 10 days, which is illegal.
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent, on instructions, would submit that the General Body Meeting is now postponed and to be scheduled on 30.01.2025 and therefore, 21 days prior notice has been complied with by the second respondent. As per Section 26(4) of the Tamil Nadu Registration Act, 1975 the Registrar may nominate an officer subordinate to him to be present at any such general meeting. The writ petition is not maintainable to challenge the notice issued by the second respondent. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Namakkal Taluk Lorry Owners Association vs. K.Nallathambi and others in W.A.No.779 of 2019, dated 11.03.2019 .
6. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent would submit that the representation, dated 11.01.2025 submitted by the petitioner is pending before the first respondent for consideration.
7. It is seen from the records that Mukuperi Pragasapuram India Ega Retchagar Sabai is registered under the Societies Registration Act on 02.08.1956. As per the Memorandum of Association and its Bye Laws, all the members of the Church whose names have been registered in the members register are the members of the Society. The General Body of the Society shall elect the members of the 8 Management Committee members. The Management Committee members shall elect President, Secretary and Treasurer and other members amongst themselves. The petitioner is a Secretary and the second respondent is a President in the Society.
8. It is pertinent to mention that Chapter -III of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 deals with the Management and Administration of the S
Adherence to procedural requirements in conducting General Body Meetings is essential for legality, emphasizing the necessity of proper notice as per Bye Laws.
The availability of public law remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is limited when there are disputed questions of fact, and the petitioner's remedy for alleged irregularities in a ....
The court affirmed the right of Bar Association members to requisition a General Body Meeting, establishing the necessity for compliance with model bylaws regarding such gatherings.
The dismissal of the appeal was based on the principle that once a request has been considered and resolved by the appropriate authority, further judicial intervention may be unnecessary.
Sub-Rule (8) of Rule 60 was not attracted in such a case as the meeting was required to be postponed due to disturbance and secondly, the date of the postponed meeting was to be decided by the member....
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.