Partly allowed

Ajay Public School Samiti, Sultanpur Thru. Manager Ms. Renu Jaiswal and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Institutional Finance, Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2024WRIC/861/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed a notice dated 29.09.2023 that erroneously clubbed proceedings under Section 12-D and Section 25(2) of the Society Registration Act, 1860, directing the Deputy Registrar to handle them separately. Liberty was granted to raise preliminary objections.

What did the court decide?

Notice dated 29.09.2023 quashed regarding clubbing; Department to hear complaints separately; liberty to raise preliminary objections.

Ajay Public School Samiti, Sultanpur Thru… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:9319

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 861 of 2024 Petitioner :- Ajay Public School Samiti, Sultanpur Thru. Manager Ms. Renu Jaiswal And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Institutional Finance, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sharad Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned State Counsel for opposite parties no.1 and 2 and Mr. Virendra Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.3 whose power filed today in Court is taken on record.

¶6

Petition has been filed challenging notice dated 07.08.2023 issued under Section 12-D of the Society Registration Act, 1860. Also under challenge is notice dated 29.09.2023 fixing a date for hearing while clubbing the proceedings under Section 12-D of the Act alongwith those of Section 25 (2) of the said Act.

¶7

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the proceedings under both the provisions are completely separate and therefore those were no occasion for the authority concerned to have clubbed both the proceedings particularly when even the complaint filed by opposite party no.3 regarding Section 12-D of the Act has no allegation made under Section 25 of the Act.

¶8

It has also been submitted that prior to issuance of notice under Section 12-D of the Act, it was incumbent upon authority concerned to have applied his mind to the allegations levelled against the Society instead of issuing notice in a routine manner.

¶9

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties have made their submission on the basis of factual aspects but admit that both the proceedings are separate.

¶10

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that opposite party no.3 has filed separate complaints under both the provisions with complaint dated 06.10.2021 having been filed with regard to Section 25(2) of the Act and the complaint dated 11.09.2022 having been filed under Section 12-D of the Act.

¶11

It appears that by means of notice dated 29.09.2023, the Deputy Registrar has clubbed both the issues and has required

¶12

petitioner to submit his reply to both whereby it appears that proceedings would be held and decided simultaneously. The provisions of Section 12-D of the Act and Section 25 of the Act are quite distinct and separate. Even the complaint made by opposite party no.3 do not have any overlapping with regard to the aforesaid sections. Therefore there was no occasion for the Deputy Registrar to have issued a single notice dated 29.09.2023 clubbing both complaints and proceedings.

¶13

In view of aforesaid, notice dated 29.09.2023 is hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari so far as it pertains to clubbing and simultaneous hearing of proceedings under Section 12-D and Section 25(2) of the Act.

¶14

Deputy Registrar shall be at liberty to hear and decide both complaints in a separate and distinct proceeding. For the purposes of determination of proceedings under Section 12-D of the Act, liberty is granted to petitioner to raise all preliminary objection which shall be decided prior to deciding the entire complaint under Section 12-D of the Act.

¶15

In view of aforesaid, petition succeeds and is allowed partly at the admission stage itself . Parties to bear their own costs.

¶16

Order Date : - 1.2.2024 Subodh/-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ajay Public School Samiti, Sultanpur Thru. Manager Ms. Renu Jaiswal and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Institutional Finance, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Public School Samiti, Sultanpur Thru. Manager Ms. Renu Jaiswal and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Institutional Finance, Lucknow and 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

Kaushal Kishore Aditya and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Awas Evan Shahri Niyojan Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Vikalp Mahesh Vs U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. Thru. Chairman Lko. and 3 Others

Kumar Saurabh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Basic Edu. Lko and 2 Others

Chhaya Kumari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Higher Education Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Ajay Public School Samiti, Sultanpur Thru. Manager Ms. Renu Jaiswal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Institutional Finance, Lucknow and Others

Mohd. Haroon Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Minority Welfare, Lucknow and Others