AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rakesh Tiwari, J.—Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri V.
Sri Tula Ram Uchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Malpura, district Agra is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The society has established a recognized institution known as Sri Tula Ram Uchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Malpura, district Agra.
It is submitted by Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel for the Petitioners that the elections of the Committee of Management of the society and the educational institution were held on 25.2.2005. In the Committee of Management of the society a Committee of Management consisting of Sri K. S. Rana as the President and Sri Balbeer Singh, Petitioner No. 2 as the Manager were elected. As regards Committee of Management of the Educational Institution a Committee of Management consisting of Sri K. S. Rana as the President, Sri Diwan Singh as the Manager and Sri Balbeer Singh as the member were elected. Sri Diwan Singh later on expired on 13.12.2007 causing a casual vacancy in the office of Manager in the Committee of Management of the Educational Institution.
It is urged that in the meeting of Committee of Management held on 23.12.2007, Petitioner No. 2, Balbir Singh was elected as the Manager for the remaining term of Committee of Management of the Educational Institution. Sri Balbir Singh, the real brother of Sri Diwan Singh set up a claim of having been elected as Manager in the vacancy caused due to death of Sri Diwan Singh at a separate meeting.
In the aforesaid back drop Petitioner No. 2, Balbir Singh filed his application dated 25.1.2008 before the Deputy Registrar for renewal of the registration certificate of the society which had not been renewed subsequent to 27.9.98 whereas Sri Bhagat Singh filed application for renewal of the society on 26.2.2008 u/s 3A (5) of the Societies Registration Act.
It appears that further in the meeting of the general body fresh election of Committee of Management of the Institution was held on 9.3.2008 in which a Committee of Management consisting of Sri K. S. Rana as the President and Sri Balbir Singh, Petitioner No. 2 as the Manager were elected. Election of the Committee of Management held by Petitioner No. 2 was recognized by the Regional Level Committee and his signatures were also attested as Manager of the Institution on 9.6.2008.
In the mean time, the Deputy Registrar, Agra issued notices to Sri Diwan Singh and Sri Bhagat Singh fixing 20.9.2008 as the date of hearing when he was informed on the date fixed that Sri Diwan Singh had already expired.
From the aforesaid facts it is apparent that insofar as issuance of notices to Sri Diwan Singh and Sri Bhagat Singh is concerned, the Committee of Management headed by Petitioner No. 1 as its Manager has been recognized by the Regional Level Committee and the signatures of Sri Balbir Singh have also been attested by the D.I.O.S., Agra. Thus, there is no dispute regarding Committee of Management of the Educational Institution which is a separate issue.
As regards the Committee of Management of the Society is concerned, admittedly the Deputy Registrar had issued notices to both the parties for hearing as the society had not been renewed since 27.9.1998. Before the Deputy Registrar the Petitioner in paragraphs 7 and 9 in his application dated January, 2008, appended as Annexure-12 to the writ petition, two specific objections were taken by him, which were also pressed in the writ petition. First objection is that Sri Bhagat Singh became a member of the general body of the society in the year 2004 as he had not deposited the membership fee, subsequently he did not even remain the member of the general body. The other objection in paragraph 9 is that Sri Bhagat Singh was related to Sri Diwan Singh, who was his real brother and as such two of them could not have remained the members of the general body of the Committee of Management of the Society in view of Clause 9 of the bye-laws.
Clause 9 of the bye-laws is as under:
According to the Clause 9 of the bye-laws the meaning of relations as defined in Regulation 4 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed u/s 16G of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act has been given in paragraph 8 of the writ petition which is as under:
According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioners both, Clause 9 of the bye-laws and the Regulation 4 of the Chapter III framed under the U. P. Intermediate Education Act extracted above are not applicable in the instant case insofar as the question of relationship given therein is concerned. Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel for the Petitioners has further urged that the dispute of Committee of Management for renewal of the certificate of society cannot be decided by the authority, which was referred u/s 25 of the Societies Registration Act for this purpose and that the finding recorded by the Deputy Registrar is inconsistent in the facts and documents submitted before the authority.
Sri H. N. Singh, learned Counsel for the Respondents has submitted that admittedly Sri Diwan Singh is no more and the Petitioner admits this fact in the election held on 13.12.2007 that Sri Bhagat Singh was the Deputy Manager of the Society and had participated in the election, as such question of his relationship with Sri Diwan Singh was of no consequence as he is no more.
He further submits that the Petitioners have failed to establish their case before the Deputy Registrar. They could not file the original documents even with regard to any meeting of the society and that it is not in dispute of the office bearers regarding renewal of the society.
He also submits that if the Petitioners contend that the Respondent is not a member of the society even then they have a remedy by way of suit for adjudication of the disputed question of membership.
In rebuttal Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel appearing for the Respondents has placed reliance upon paragraphs 32 to 36 of the writ petition wherein it has been averred that in the proceedings before the Assistant Registrar, Sri Bhagat Singh had filed documents in support of his claim that the election of the Committee of Management of the society has been held on 15.2.2004 followed by fresh election dated 11.2.2007. Though the Committee of Management (allegedly educational Society Sri Tula Ram Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Malpura, district Agra) has been arrayed as Respondent No. 3 but Sri Bhagat Singh has not been arrayed as party in the writ petition against whom relief has been sought as in his favour the Assistant Registrar under the Societies Registration Act has issued renewal certificate. It is also not in dispute that Sri Diwan Singh has expired. Thus, it is admitted that there is no dispute of election of the Committee of Management of the Society and that the Petitioner was appointed as Manager after the death of Sri Diwan Singh for remaining term of the Committee of Management in the meeting held on 28.12.2007.
In my opinion, bye-laws would not be attracted in the facts and circumstances of this case. The Assistant Registrar has considered the case of the parties and has recorded findings of facts that the documents submitted by Petitioner No. 2 were forged and manufactured documents whereas Respondent No. 3 has been validly elected person. The relevant findings of the Assistant Registrar are as under:
The only question before this Court is as to whether the registration certificate has been renewed on the basis of forged and manufactured documents said to have been filed by the Petitioner or on the basis of the documents filed by the Respondents. It is settled law that the renewal of the society does not vest in any person with any legal authority to manage the society as its office bearers for the reasons that renewal of the society is in the interest of the society itself. There is no dispute regarding election of Petitioner No. 2 as the Manager of the Committee of Management of the College which may be a separate Committee of Management than the Committee of Management of the Society. If there is any dispute regarding membership of the society, the Petitioners may raise dispute u/s 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 or may avail remedy of suit, which is available to them.
For all the reasons stated above, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter under Article 226 of the Constitution. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.