2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 54456

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

WRIT PETITION NO.226437 OF 2020 (EDN-RES)

C/W

WRIT PETITION NO.202274 OF 2014 (GM-ST/RN)

W.P.NO.226437/2020:

BETWEEN:

SRI. SHIVANAND VIDYA VARDHAK SANGH

MASABINAL, TQ: BASVAN BAGEWADI,

DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586203

BY ITS SECRETARY,

SRI. VEERAGONDAPPA M. PARANNAVAR

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. BASAVARAJ KAREDDY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY

EDUCATION,

M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

RPTD. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

2.

THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER

PUBLIC INSTRUCTION (EDUCATION) DEPARTMENT

OFFICE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

BELGUM DIVISION,

HALIYAL ROAD, DHARWAD-580001.

3.

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR

PUBLIC EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

2

OFFICE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,

VIJAYAPUR-586101.

4.

THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES

VIJAYAPUR-586101.

5.

THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER

BASAVAN BAGEWADI, TQ: BASAVAN BAGEWADI,

DIST: VIJAYAPURA-586203

6.

NINGAYYA

S/O SANGAYYA CHOWKIMATH

AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS

R/O MASABINAL, TQ: BASAVAN BAGEWADI,

DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586203

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT

ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 5;

SRI. B.B.PATIL AND SRI. R.J.BHUSARE, ADVOCATE FOR

RESPONDENT NO.6)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH

THE ORDER OF RESPONDENT NO.2 DATED 02.03.2020 IN FILE

BEARING

NO.f8/SÁ²C/SÁºÀÄvÀ/C£ÀÄ/25/2011-12/3525

VIDE

ANNEXURE-J

AND

ITS

CONSEQUENTIAL

The question whether the Trust was converted into society or not and the question whether the registration - recognition of the educational institutions by the Trust would enure to the benefit of the society and whether the property of the Trust merged with the Society are all questions of fact and law that had to be adjudicated by the Civil Court and not by the statutory authorities.

Headnote:

SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT - [TRUST] - [SOCIETY] - The Trust and the Society carry the same name and hence wherever relevant they shall be referred to as “Trust” or “Society”. The petitioner claims to be the secretary of Sri Shivanand Vidya Vardhak Sangh (henceforth to referred as 'Trust' for short) which was registered as a public trust on 21.10.1971 under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 (henceforth referred to as 'BPT Act, 1950'). He claimed that the Trust had established an English composite Junior college at Masabinal and new High school at Basavana Bagewadi. He claimed that the Trust owned land in Sy.No.89 of Masabinal measuring 05 acres 10 guntas and Sy.No.135 of B.Bagewadi measuring 01 acre 38 guntas. The Trust was allegedly receiving enormous amount in the form of grant from the Government. The petitioner alleged that he along with 10 members were elected on 05.06.1992 to the Governing body of the trust for the period 05.06.1992 to 04.06.1994. A report of the change of management of Trust was filed before the Assistant Charity Commissioner, which was contested by certain persons. The Assistant Charity Commissioner in terms of his order dated 01.07.1994 in Enquiry No.695/1992 accepted the change in Management, which was challenged by the objectors before the Charity Commissioner in Appeal No.10/1994 where the parties were directed to maintain status quo.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner claims to be the Secretary of a Trust, challenging an order dated 29.01.2014 (Annexure-S) passed by the respondent No.2, at an enquiry under Section 25 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (henceforth referred to as 'the Act of 1960') by which the annual returns submitted by Shivanand Vidya Vardhak Sangh for the year 2011-12 and list of committee members for the 2012-13 and the annual returns for the year 2012-13 and list of committee members for the year 2013-14 of Shivananda Vidyavardaka Sangha, a society registered as Reg.No.68/2004-05, was accepted. The petitioner has also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus for a direction to the respondent No.2 to hold an independent enquiry as regards the audit reports of the society named. Shivanand Vidya Vardhak Sangha.

Finding of the Court:

The dispute essentially between the parties in this writ petition relates to the existence of a Trust and whether the members of the Trust constituted it as a Society, in view of the repeal of BPT Act, 1950 by the Act of 1997. The petitioner claims that the Government of Karnataka had issued a clarification that notwithstanding such repeal, educational institutions established shall be governed by The Charitable And Religious Trust Act, 1920. On the contrary, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 claimed that keeping the best interest of the students and a circular issued by the State that educational institutions established by a Trust registered under the BPT Act, 1950 would be governed under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, the Trust was converted into a society.

Issues: 1. Whether the Trust was converted into a society or not?2. Whether the registration - recognition of the educational institutions by the Trust would enure to the benefit of the society?3. Whether the property of the Trust merged with the Society?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. A perusal of the compromise recorded in W.P.No.11187/2014 makes it abundantly clear that the petitioner was privy to the fact that the Trust was converted to a society. The fact that the petitioner was an office bearer of the Managing Committee of the Society was not denied by him. He also did not deny that he filed the list of managing committee of the society elected at the Annual General Meeting held on 21.09.2012. He therefore, cannot now turn around and claim that the Trust was not converted into a society.2. The question whether the Trust was converted into society or not and the question whether the registration - recognition of the educational institutions by the Trust would enure to the benefit of the society and whether the property of the Trust merged with the Society are all questions of fact and law that had to be adjudicated by the Civil Court and not by the respondent Nos.2 and 3.

Final Decision: 1. The writ petition No.202274/2014 fails and is dismissed with costs.2. W.P.No.226437/2020 is allowed and the order dated 02.03.2020 passed by respondent No.2 and consequential order dated 15.06.2020 passed by respondent No.3 are quashed.