Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.R.SWAMINATHAN
Arsha Vidya Parampara Trust – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Rep.by Ministry of Home Affairs, (FCRA Wing), I Floor, Mayor Dyan Chand National Stadium, Near Pragati Maidan, New Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. trust's registration application originally submitted under fcra. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments presented regarding the legality of fcra application rejection. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 3. court's discussion on natural justice and void due to vagueness. (Para 5 , 7) |
| 4. evaluation of statutory interpretation and compounding violations. (Para 10 , 12) |
| 5. final determination on the validity of rejection and procedural discrepancies. (Para 14 , 19) |
ORDER :
G.R. Swaminathan, J.
The petitioner is a trust established on 08.06.2017. The founders are the disciples of Swami Dayananda Saraswati of Arsha Vidya Gurukalam, Coimbatore. The petitioner is engaged in teaching and training students from around the world, for spreading knowledge of Vedanta along with Sanskrit language, teaching Hatha Yoga and yoga philosophy and also digitizing and preserving ancient manuscripts.
2.The petitioner applied to the second respondent for registration under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 . The application was not processed for three years. In October 2024, certain queries were raised. There was exchange of correspondence between the parties. The petitioner submitted a fresh application in For
Compounding a violation under the FCRA Act rectifies the applicant's status, and vague basis for rejection violates principles of natural justice.
An appeal under Section 31(2) of the FCRA, 2010 is maintainable against the rejection of a renewal application, emphasizing the necessity for clear reasoning in rejection orders.
Point of law : By the time suspension order was passed, the Central Government had neither issued any notice of hearing / Show Cause notice in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 14 nor had it initia....
Point of law: By the time suspension order was passed, the Central Government had neither issued any notice of hearing/Show Cause notice in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 14 nor had it initiated....
The requirement for a personal hearing before the cancellation of registration under the FCRA is essential when the consequences are severe, as outlined in Section 14(2) of the Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
