Back
2018 Supreme(All) 30
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
MANOJ MISRA, J.
COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT, SAMAJ SEWAK SAMITI SHIV MANGAL AND OTHERS - Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS - Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 23386 of 2017, decided on 10th January, 2018)
Counsel :
Ashish Kumar Ojha and R.K. Ojha for the Petitioners; C.S.C., Ashutosh Mani Tripathi, Daya Shanker Mani Tripathi, Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi and Vijay Kumar Singh for the Respondents.
Headnote:Societies Registration Act, 1860 – Sections 4-A, 2, 33, 12, 22 and 24 – U.P. Societies Registration Rules, 1976 – Rules 5 and 17 – Registered Society – Bye-laws – Assistant Registrar by order rejected objection taken by petitioners in respect of registration of certain amendments in aims and objects as well as bye-laws of the Society – A copy of amendment is required to be submitted for registration and it need not be signed by all such persons who had been signatory to that document though it has to be submitted under signature of not less than three members of governing body of society – As such, if a copy of change made in rules of society is submitted, it cannot be discarded simply because it has not been signed by all persons who were signatory to that document – Registration is not to be done mechanically but with due application of mind, particularly, when challenge is laid to it – Impugned order set aside – Directions issued. [Paras 22 to 35]
Result; Petition Allowed.
Hon’ble Manoj Misra, J.—Heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Ashish Kumar Ojha, for the petitioners; learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2; Sri G.K. Singh, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Ashutosh Mani Tripathi, for the respondent No. 3.
2. The present petition assails an order dated 19.4.2017 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Allahabad (in short Assistant Registrar) by which objection taken by the petitioners in respect of registration of certain amendments in the aims and objects as well as the bye-laws of the Society has been rejected.
3. To better understand the controversy, it would be apposite to take notice of few facts.
4. There is a registered Society by the name of Samaj Sevak Samiti Shiv Mangal Nagar, Manethu, Belwa, Allahabad (in short the Society). The last undisputed election of the office bearers of the Society was held on 25.11.2012 in which one Radhey Shyam Mishra was elected President; Sita Ram Shukla (petitioner No. 2) was elected Manager; and Keshav Dev Tripathi (respondent No. 3) was elected Deputy Manager. On 12.7.2013, purportedly, under the signature of petitioner No. 2 as well as three other members of the Committee of Management, four resolutions were submitted for being recorded in the register of Societies maintained in the office of Assistant Registrar. These four resolutions were: (i) resolution dated 13.1.2013 of Committee of Management of the Society seeking amendment in the aims and objects of the Society; (ii) resolution dated 27.1.2013 of the General Body of the Society accepting the proposed amendment in the aims and objects of the Society; (iii) resolution dated 9.6.2013 of Committee of Management of the Society effecting change in the bye-laws of the Society relating to membership fee as well as procedure for induction of members, etc; and (iv) resolution dated 16.6.2013 of General Body of the Society ratifying the aforesaid resolutions.
5. The Assistant Registrar registered the said resolutions on 20.12.2013.
6. The petitioner No. 2 is the Manager of the Committee of Management of the Society; the petitioner No. 3 is its Vice-President whereas petitioners 4, 5 and 6 are members of the Committee of Management of the Society; the remaining three petitioners, namely, petitioner No. 7, 8 and 9 are members of the General Body of the Society.
7. According to the petitioners the aforesaid resolutions were bogus and when it came to their knowledge that such resolutions had been tendered for registration, on 3.8.2014 a meeting of the General Body of the Society was held and, by a resolution, the resolutions dated 13.1.2013, 27.1.2013, 9.6.2013 and 16.6.2013 were declared bogus and invalid. Thereafter, a detailed objection was taken before the Assistant Registrar to cancel the registration of those resolutions.
8. In the objection, the petitioners took a plea that resolutions dated 13.1.2013, 27.1.2013, 9.6.2013 and 16.6.2013 were never passed and that the letter forwarding those alleged resolutions carried forged signatures. In support of the objection, affidavits of as many as six out of twelve members of the Committee of Management of the Society, and nine out of nineteen members of the General Body of the Society including members of Committee of Management were filed denying their participation in the meeting as well as holding of meeting relating to those resolutions.
9. The Assistant Registrar by his order dated 26.10.2015 allowed the objection and canceled the registration order dated 20.12.2013. Against the order dated 26.10.2015, Writ C No. 67032 of 2015 was filed by the third respondent. vide order dated 21.3.2017, the said petition was disposed off by directing that the writ petitioner and the contesting respondent would appear on a particular date before the Assistant Registrar and shall submit their documents and thereafter fresh order would be passed, without being influenced by the previous order, an
