Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 6426
GAHC010267042022 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/8434/2022 THE ARYA PATH KALI MANDIR COMMITTEE ARYA GIRLS HOSTEL ROAD, (REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SAID COMMITTEE, NAMELY, SUROJIT SIDDHA), AGED 47 YEARS, S/O SRI MRINAL KANTI SIDDHA, GOPINATH NAGAR, ARYA GIRLS HOSTEL ROAD, P.O.-GOPINATH NAGAR, GUWAHATI-16, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS TYHE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE (SETTLEMENT) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6
2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP (METRO) DISTRICT ASSAM
3:THE CIRCLE OFFICER GUWAHATI REVENUE CIRCLE GUWAHATI DIST-KAMRUP (M)
ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR . B MALAKAR Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
['B MALAKAR', '', 'T ROY', 'M ROY', 'SC', 'REVENUE', '', 'GA', 'ASSAM']
ORDER
Date : 02-01-2023 Heard Mr. B. Malakar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. R.
Borpujari, learned standing counsel for the Revenue (Settlement) Department appearing for the respondent no.1 and Mr. C.K.S. Baruah, learned Govt.
Advocate for the respondent nos.2 and 3.
2. Aggrieved by the eviction notice bearing No.GC.49/2015/2928 dated 10.11.2022, issued by the respondent no.3, the present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground that the respondent authorities are contemplating eviction of the Kali temple.
3. The learned standing counsel for the respondent no.1 has raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the writ petition on account of the fact that there is no material in the writ petition to show that the petitioner no.1 Association is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner would not have any locus standi to maintain this writ petition.
4. Heard both sides on the issue of maintainability raised by the learned standing counsel for the respondent no.1.
5. The learned standing counsel for the respondent no.1 has referred to the case of Meghalaya Wild Dealers Association Vs. State of Meghalaya, (2010) 5 GLR 332: 2010 (2) GLT 673, whereby the Division Bench of this Court, by taking note of the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Sree Mohan Chowdhury Vs. The Chief Commissioner, Tripura, AIR 1964 SC 173 and B. Srinivasa Reddy Vs. Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board Employees’ Association and ors., (2006) 11 SCC 731, held to the effect that the writ petition by an unregistered association would not be maintainable by specifically holding that when the association does not assume the character of a legal person, it cannot enforce right in its favour. This Court is bound by the principle decided by the Division Bench of the Court.
6. Accordingly, as the petitioner association is an unregistered Society, the Court is inclined to hold that the petitioner would not have a locus standi to file this writ petition.
7. Hence, this writ petition stands dismissed on preliminary issue of maintainability.
8. However, the dismissal of the writ petition shall not be a bar for the petitioner or its constituents to move the competent authority for appropriate relief and/or for redressal of their grievance, if any.
