A society primarily serving its members does not qualify for registration under public purpose provisions as per the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001.

ORDER :

This Writ Petition is filed with the following prayer:

“…to issue a Writ, Order of Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ calling for the records pertaining to Certificate of Registration of Respondent No. 4 bearing No. 682 of 2013 dt. 27.09.2013 issued by Respondent No. 3 and consequently quash the Certificate of Registration of Respondent No. 4 herein bearing No. 682 dt. 27.09.2013 registered by Respondent No. 3 as being arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and violative of inter alia, Article, 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and further being contrary to Circular Memo No. Soc/7124/2018 dt. 28-01-2019, Section 3 of ANDHRA PRADESH SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT , 2001 and pass…”

2. Heard Mr. D.Jagan Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. D.Haritha Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Ms. Tanushree Bose, learned counsel representing Mr. T.S.Anirudh Reddy for respondent No.4.

3. It is the case of petitioner that respondent No.3 registered respondent No.4 as a society on 27.09.2013 under ANDHRA PRADESH SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT , 2001 (presently Telangana Societies Registration Act, 2001) (Certificate of Registration Pg.14 P1). It is further the case that Certificate of Registration bearing No.682, dated 27.09.2013 issued, is violative of provisions of the Act and contrary to Circular Memo bearing No. Soc/7124/2018, dated 28.01.2019 under the Telangana Societies Registration Act, 2001 (for short, the Act, 2001). It is also the case of petitioner that owners of residential flats in Janapriya Metropolis Apartments have formed themselves into an Association and got registration done and the same is not valid under law as the definition of ‘public purpose’ is not made out.

4. It is submitted that Section 3 of the Act, 2001 mandates registration of a Society, which promotes certain activities enumerated in the Section and also for any public purpose. Laying stress on the contents of Section 3 of the Act, 2001, it is contended that respondent No.4-Society does not promote, profess, propagate or undertake any activities which fall under the ambit of ‘public purpose’. It is further contended that the phrase ‘public purpose’, embedded in Section 3 of the Act, 2001, by no stretch of imagination, can be said to cover the activities undertaken by the Association comprising of owners of residential flats of Janapriya Metropolis Apartments. It is also submitted that Writ Petition bearing No.21592 of 2021 pending before the Hon’ble High Court (in which an interim order came to be passed on 08.09.2021), does not have any bearing on the present facts of the case. It is submitted that registration of Association and issuance of certificate is not in accordance with law.

5. It is contended that the purport of the phrase ‘public purpose’ has to be viewed in a larger perspective, the same cannot be interpreted in a narrow manner and be made applicable to the activities undertaken by respondent No.4-Association.

6. Reliance is placed on a judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.8856 of 2022. It is pointed out that the learned Single Judge dealing with a similar issue had held that members of an Association (of flats) are individuals who come together to promote the maintenance of apartments purchased by them. That even if the term ‘any public purpose’ is stretched, the objects of respondent No.4-Association would not