SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 73507

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DURAISWAMY
HAAFIL.K – Appellant
Versus
THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU – Respondent



BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.09.2021 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR W.A(MD)No.1750 of 2021 and C.M.P(MD)No.7414 and 7415 of 2021 K.Haafil ... Appellant/Petitioner Vs.

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Secretary, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

2.The Inspector General of Registration (Societies), No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600 029.

3.The District Registrar (Societies), Heber Road, Contonment, Trichy – 620 020.

4.Majlisul Ulama, Represented by its General Secretary, Majlisul Ulama Campus, Kaja Nagar, Trichy – 620 020.

5.The Election Officer, Majlisul Ulama Campus, Kaja Nagar, Trichy – 620 020.

6.A.S.Kajamian Akthar ... Respondents/Respondents Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order, dated 18.08.2021 made in W.P(MD)No.12454 of

2021 on the file of this Court.

For Appellant : Mr.R.Thiyagarajan for Mr.N.Balaji For RR 1 to 3 : Mr.Veera Kathiravan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader For R – 4 : Mr.V.Ramanujam Senior Counsel For R – 6 : Mr.T.Mohan for Mr.M.Saravanan

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.DURAISWAMY,J.

Challenging the order passed in W.P.(MD) No.12454 of 2021 dated 18.08.2021, the Writ petitioner has filed the above Writ Appeal.

2.The appellant filed the Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to hold election to the fourth respondent society by providing the petitioner and other members an opportunity to participate in the election by appointing a former Judge of this Court to act as an observer along with the officer to be nominated by the third respondent in terms of Section 26(4) of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 to supervise and observe the fair conduct of election to the third respondent society.

3.The petitioner seeks a direction to hold the election to the fourth respondent society after providing the petitioner and other members an opportunity to participate in such election by appointing a former Judge of this Court to act as an observer in respect thereof.

4.It is not in dispute that the appellant is a member of the general body of the fourth respondent society. The said society was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The appellant alleged factionalism in the society and complete failure of administration and also misappropriation of funds and alienation of assets in society in contravention of law.

5.The third respondent issued an election notification for the society and the main grievance of the appellant is that such elections are sham elections without real contest. The election notification was issued on 06.07.2021 and the election schedule was also issued on the same day. As per the election notification, the election was scheduled to be held on 29.07.2021.

6.Subsequent to the issuance of the election notification, the appellant filed the Writ Petition seeking for the prayer as mentioned above and the learned Single Judge by order dated 26.07.2021 granted an order of interim injunction not to proceed further with the election. Further, the learned Single Judge has also directed the parties to maintain status quo until further orders. Thereafter, the Writ Petition was taken up for final hearing and the learned Single Judge by his order dated 18.08.2021 dismissed the Writ Petition. The order passed by the learned Single Judge is impugned in this Writ Appeal.

7.It is not in dispute that the third respondent had already issued an election notification.

8.It is settled law that after the issuance of election notification, the Courts shall not interfere with the electoral disputes in respect of the election process.

9.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied on the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in C.M.S.Evangelical Suvi David Memorial Higher Secondary School and others Vs. The Di

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top