IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
C/M Maharshi Kapil Muni Shiksha Samiti And Another – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. And Another – Respondent
Writ C No. 19885 of 2020
Decided on : 08-12-2020
Societies Registration Act, 1960 – Section 13A, 13B, 13(B) (2) - Dissolution by court - Power of Registrar to apply for dissolution - Writ petition was filed alleging that petitioners have dissolved their society by Resolution in accordance with the scheme of Societies Registration Act, 1960 and have transferred assets and liabilities to the newly created trust in the name of Maharshi Kapil Muni Shiksha Trust – Held, Court are concerned with the voluntary dissolution under Section 13, which simply requires the passing of a resolution by the members of the society no being less than three-forth of the total members of the society - Once the said condition is met, no other condition is required to be fulfilled and the same does not require a seal of approval by any officer or authority - In present case, it is alleged that by a resolution passed unanimously i.e. by more than three-fifth members of the society, the society has been dissolved, as such, no further approval is required and the dissolution would be deemed to be effective from the date of its passing - As Court have recorded above that no seal of approval is required for dissolving the society as has been done in the present case, a writ, as prayed for cannot be granted, however, petitioners are directed to give an information in writing along with the copy of Resolution to the Assistant Registrar of Societies who shall record the same in his records - Writ petition disposed off.
JUDGMENT :
1. Present writ petition was filed alleging that the petitioners have dissolved their society by Resolution dated 1.4.2011 in accordance with the scheme of Societies Registration Act, 1960 (in short 'the Act') and have transferred assets and liabilities to the newly created trust in the name of Maharshi Kapil Muni Shiksha Trust.
2. Petitioner claims that in terms of the resolution passed, an application was moved before the Respondent No. 2 for approval of the resolution.
3. Counsel for the petitioner argues that the application filed before the Respondent No. 2 for approval of the resolution dated 1.4.2011 is pending consideration, as such, he prays that a suitable writ, order or direction be issued to the Respondent No. 2 to take a decision on the said application.
4. This Court raised a pointed query to the counsel for the petitioner as to where is the provision prescribed under the Act conferring the power on the Assistant Registrar to approve the resolution passed by the society for its dissolution.
5. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the provisions of Section 13 of the Act. There appears to be no such provision, as such, I consider it appropriate to discuss the scope of Section 13 containing a provision for dissolution of societies and adjustment of their affairs. The provision for dissolution of societies and adjustment of their affairs is contained in Section 13, which is as under:
Provided that no society shall be dissolved unless three-fifths of the members shall have expressed a wish for such dissolution by their votes delivered in person, or by proxy, at a general meeting convened for the purpose:
Provided that [whenever any Government] is a member of, or a contributor to, or otherwise interested in any society registered under this Act, such society shall not be dissolved [without the consent of the Government of the [State] of registration.]"
6. The State of Uttar Pradesh has amended the Societies Registration Act insofar its applicability in the State of Uttar Pradesh is concerned and Section 13A and Section 13B have been incorporated in the Act providing for dissolution of the society in manner other than a voluntary dissolution as provided under Section 13 of the Act, which is quoted hereinabove.
7. Section 13A and 13B amended by virtue of U.P. Act No. 52 of 1975 are quoted as under:-
(2) if on or before the date specified in the notice or within such extended period as the Registrar may allow, the society fails to show any cause or if the cause shown is considered by the Registrar to be unsatisfactory, the Registrar, may move the C
SupremeToday
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.