Allowed

Committe of Management Madhubhan Shiksha Samiti and Another v. State of Up and 6 Others

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2024WRIC/22711/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging an order cancelling a registered Committee of Management list and directing vacancy filling. Court set aside order for violation of natural justice due to lack of hearing opportunity, remanding matter for fresh inquiry with full hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; matter remanded to Assistant Registrar for fresh decision after full hearing within three months.

Committe of Management Madhubhan Shiksha Samiti and… — Company and Corporate | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:124080

¶2

Court No. - 34

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 22711 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Committe Of Management Madhubhan Shiksha Samiti And Another Respondent :- State Of Up And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vinod Kumar Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶6

Sri Vinod Kumar Pandey, Advocate filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No. 6, the same is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Vinod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for respondents No. 3 to 6 and Sri Jitendra Narayana Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents No. 1 and 2.

¶8

By means of the present petition the petitioners have challenged the impugned order dated 26.6.2024 passed by the Assistant Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra Region, Agra (respondent no. 2) whereby the registered list of the members/ office bearers of the Committee of Management has been cancelled with a direction for filling up the vacancies in accordance with the provisions of the bye-laws of the Society.

¶9

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that under the by-laws of the society the General Body consist four types of members i.e. Pattern members, Life members, Ordinary members and Special members. Clause 8 of aforesaid bye-laws provides that the General Body of Society is competent to convene meeting of all types of members. Clause 9 of the said bye-laws deals with the constitution of the Committee of Management and clause 9 (E) of the same provides that in case, any vacancy occurs in the Committee of Management the said post would be filled up by the General Body of the Society for the remaining term of the Committee of Management. As per the bye-laws the term of the Committee of Management is five years.

¶10

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the periodical election of the Committee of Management was held on

¶11

29.11.2020 and the said election was duly registered in the office of the Assistant Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra Region, Agra (respondent no. 2). It so happened that during the continuation of the term of Committee of Management that was constituted on 29.11.2020 for a period of five years; Sri Laxman Singh Yadav, Manager and Sri Charan Singh Yadav, Vice President and one Member of the Committee of Management expired. In order to fill up the vacancy caused due to death of the Sri Laxman Singh Yadav, Charan Singh Yadav and Sri Manu Bhai D. Patel. The agenda notice was circulated and accordingly meeting of the General Body was held, wherein more than 2/3 members of the General Body of the Society participated. Thereafter, the papers relating to the proceeding of the General Body decision was submitted in the office of Assistant Registrar on 20.12.2023. On receipt of the aforesaid proceedings the Assistant Registrar (respondent no. 2) registered the Annual-List of the Committee of Management in respect to the year 2023-24, vide order dated 26.12.2023.

¶12

After the aforesaid registration of Committee of Management of Society made vide order dated 26.12.2023, the respondents no. 3 to 7 herein, moved a written complaint before the respondent no. 2 on 04.01.2024 raising objection with regard to the genuineness of the aforesaid proceedings of the General Body whereby the vacant posts of the Committee of Management of Society was filled up. The said complaint contained certain allegations to the effect that the proceedings is fake and fabricated.

¶13

The Assistant Registrar respondent no.2 on the receipt of the aforesaid complaint, made by the respondents no. 3 to 7, issued notices on 05.01.2024 directing the present petitioners to appear before him within a period of two weeks.

¶14

The learned counsel for petitioners has very emphatically submitted that on receipt of the notice dated 05.01.2024 the petitioners approached the office of Assistant Registrar (respondent no.2) and made request to provide them a copy of the aforesaid complaint filed by the respondents no. 3 to 7 and also to provide documents based upon which the complaint was made, vide letter dated 29.1.2024 but despite repeated request the respondent no. 2 did not provide any copy of complaint nor it's supporting documents. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that another notice dated 19.4.2024 was also said to have been issued by the respondent no. 2. however the same was never served upon the petitioners. In any case, the petitioners on getting information from some sources, approached

¶15

the office of respondent no. 2 and obtain the copy of the said notice dated 19.4.2024. However, the respondent no. 2 allowed 15 days time to the petitioners to file their response.

¶16

After receiving the notice dated 19.4.2024 the petitioner visited the office of the Assistant Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra Region, Agra more than two times but on each and every occasion the Assistant Registrar was found not-available and due to the aforesaid reasons no hearing could not have taken place in response to the notice dated 19.04.2024. It has been further submitted that the period of 15 days as contemplated under the said notice dated 19.04.2024 have elapsed on 04.05.2024 and in between no hearing took place. The submission as advanced by learned counsel for petitioners is that since the matter was lying pending before the Assistant Registrar (respondent no. 2) the petitioners remained under bona-fide impression that another notice would be issued to intimate some date for hearing. However, the petitioners received the impugned order dated 26.04.2024 passed by the respondent no. 2 by which the List of Committee of Management that was registered way back on 26.12.2023 came to be cancelled.

¶17

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the finding recorded by the respondent no. 2 while passing the impugned order is totally perverse to the effect that the petitioners have failed to produce any documentary evidence before the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra Region, Agra. He further contended that the affidavits filed by the complainants on 22.3.2024 and thereafter on 12.6.2024 were taken into consideration by the respondent no. 2 in the most arbitrarily and illegal manner as said affidavits were filed by the complainants at the back of the petitioners i.e. after 19.04.2024 and as such the same were not within the knowledge of the petitioners. Further, the private respondents filed 25 notarial affidavit before the Assistant Registrar and out of more than nine members have given their notarial affidavits in favour of petitioners, in which they have specifically denied their submission of any affidavit in favour of private respondents. This aspect of the matter has also not been considered by the respondent no. 2 while passing the impugned order.

¶18

It is the settled legal position that consideration of the documentary evidence filed behind the back of party without any opportunity of rebuttal to the other side is against the law.

¶19

The next submission advanced by learned counsel for the

¶20

petitioners is that the proceedings to fill up the vacancies were carried out by the General Body strictly in accordance with byelaws. Once the Assistant Registrar (respondent no.2) registered the List that too, the only List of the Committee of Management, in exercise of it's power under Section 4 of the Societies Registration Act, he/she has no power under the Act to review or recall the same.

¶21

Per contra learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents no. 3 to 6 submitted that the petitioners were duly informed about the said proceedings and the copy of the aforesaid complaint was provided to the petitioners which is evident from the letter dated 12.2.2024 issued by the respondent no. 2 to the petitioners as contained in Annexure no. 7 to the writ petition.

¶22

Taking into consideration the factual matrix of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order dated 26.6.2024 has been passed without affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and, therefore, the same is violative of the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 26.6.2024 is hereby set-aside . The matter is remand back with a direction to the respondent no. 2 to decide the aforesaid complaint afresh after affording full opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and by taking into consideration the documents submitted by the respective parties in the matter.

¶23

The parties present before this Court are directed to appear before the Assistant Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra Region, Agra (respondent no. 2) on 20.8.2024, in the aforesaid matter. The Assistant Registrar (respondent No. 2) shall make every endevaour to decide the same, by passing a reasoned and speaking order; within a maximum period of three months from the aforesaid date fixed by this Court i.e. 20.8.2024.

¶24

The writ petition is accordingly, allowed with aforesaid observations and directions.

¶25

Order Date :- 1.8.2024 Md Faisal

¶26

Digitally signed by :- MOHD FAISAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Committe of Management Madhubhan Shiksha Samiti and Another v. State of Up and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Committe of Management Madhubhan Shiksha Samiti and Another v. State of Up and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jan Jyoti Institute of Para Medical Sciences vs Regional Director National Institute of Open Schooling and 2 Others

Dharmendra Singh Gautam vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kshitij Soni Minor vs State of Up and 2 Others

Milwa Devi vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rinki vs State of Up and 3 Others

Smt Munni vs State of Up and 12 Others