Balwant Singh and others vs Registrar of Firms and Societies, Punjab and Another

Rajiv Narain Raina, J.—Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that since common questions of fact and law are involved in the above noted 4 writ petitions, they may be heard and disposed of by a common judgment. The impugned orders are placed at different Annexure numbers in these cases. Facts have, however, been extracted from CWP No. 21725 of 2010. In all these cases the petitioners have prayed for issuance of writ of certiorari quashing orders, Annexure P-7 and P-8, dated 24.11.2010 and the order dated 27.12.2010 (Annexure P-10 in CWP No. 3514 of 2011) passed by the Registrar of Firms and Societies, Punjab, Chandigarh, with respect to the elections to the College Council, Nakodar, District Jalandhar, a private society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, which elections were held under directives issued by the Supreme Court vide order dated 12.04.2010 passed in Civil Appeal No. 3400-3401 of 2006.

The first impugned order dated 24.11.2010 (Annexure P-5) has rejected the case of four members of the Society as not being eligible to take part in the elections to the managing committee of the Society. Their right to vote in the election of the College Council has been rejected. By the second impugned order dated 24.11.2010 (Annexure P-6), the claim of 102 land donors claimants has been considered. The second type of claimants are those, who after the death of the land donor have been issued certificate by the College Council accepting them as nominees of the deceased land donor members. The third kind of claimants are those, who claim to be nominees of the deceased land donor but have not been issued any certificate by the College Council of being member. It is not disputed that there is no elected managing committee of the College Council in position. A temporary committee was constituted under Court orders to carry out the day to day work of the College till the elections are held to the managing committee. The Registrar has held that the first and second category are eligible but the third category who do not have certificate of acceptance as members, are not eligible to vote. 14 members from the above two categories have been identified as being eligible to vote. The third order passed on the same day relates to 144 claimants qua life members/patrons/donor and representatives of members. 19 such members have been found eligible to vote under the provisions of the constitution of the College Council, 1969.

The fourth order dated 27.12.2010 impugned in this petition has been passed by the Registrar pursuant to the orders dated 13.12.2010 passed by this Court in CWP No. 21903 of 2010, in which a complaint was made for quashing certain orders including the orders dated 24.11.2010 impugned in this petition as being non-speaking and not disclosing reasons for declaring aggrieved persons ineligible to cast their votes. It has however been directed that the election may be held as per the notified schedule but subject to the final outcome of the pending proceedings.

Notice of motion in this case was issued on 28.02.2011. The respondents have put in appearance and contested their cases by filing separate written statements.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

It is not disputed before me that this Court had permitted the election to proceed. The elections were held. An elected managing committee is in existence for the last 2 1/2 years. The holding of election was not interjected by this Court. Without commenting on the correctness or otherwise of the impugned orders I do not find that this is a fit case for interference or that it is absolutely necessary or expedient to do so. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the elections they may avail their alternative remedies either by way of an election petition or by way of instituting a civil suit where the provisions of the constitution of the council can be examined in depth in the context of voting rights of different categories of voters.

I am told that the society runs two educational institutions which are colleges known as Guru Nanak National College for Men and Guru Nanak National College for Women at Nakodar in District Jalandhar, Punjab. The judgment of the Supreme Court passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 3400-3401 of 2010 titled ''Varinder Partap Singh Sandhu Vs. Pritam Singh Sarinh and others'' dated 12.04.2010 arose out of the proceedings instituted in the Civil Court and came to the High Court through appeals and revisions. In matters relating to private societies, issues of membership and voting rights are not normally open to judicial review in writ jurisdiction. See Executive Committee of Vaish Degree College, Shamli and Others Vs. Lakshmi Narain and Others, The orders of the Registrar could be put to judicial review before the Civil Court exercising territorial jurisdiction. The nature and quality of jurisdiction exercised by the Civil Court on appreciation of evidence led by both the sides is in many ways superior to the jurisdiction exercised by this Court in writ jurisdiction which is based on affidavit and counter affidavit jurisdiction. The Civil Court exercises plenary jurisdiction in such matters and is an effective remedy. No interference is called for in these cases in extraordinary writ jurisdiction and the petitioners in this and in the connected writ petitions would remain at liberty to challenge the orders of the Registrar before the Civil Court or to seek any other alternative remedy available in law. Dismissed. No costs.