Karnataka High Court
B Balaji vs The Hebbar Sri Vaishnava Sabha (Regd) on 1 April, 2019
Author: Alok Aradhe
Bench: Alok Aradhe
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2019
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
WRIT PETITION NO.50154 OF 2017 (GM-KSR)
BETWEEN:
B. BALAJI
S/O SRI. B.G. BHAGAVAN
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/AT. ADVOCATE & LAND LORD KADABA
GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572129.
... PETITIONER
(BY MR. VASUDEVA IYENGAR K.T. ADV.)
AND:
1. THE HEBBAR SRI VAISHNAVA SABHA (REGD)
REPTD BY SRI H N RAMAPRASAD
S/O SRI NARASIMHA SWAMY
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
THE PRESIDENT & CHAIRMAN
NO.22, SESHADRI ROAD
BANGALORE-560 009.
2. THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES
GOVERNMENT OF KANATAKA
KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD COMPLEX
CAUVERY BHAVAN, VIII FLOOR, K G ROAD
BANGALORE-560 009.
3. SRI. M.K. GOVINDARAJAN
S/O SRI. KESHAVA MURTHY
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
No.2579, 8TH B MAIN ROAD
II STAGE, BSK, BANGALORE-70.
4. SRI. H.R. SRINIVASAN
S/O SRI. H.R.R. KYENGAR
AGEDA BOUT 77 YEARS
2
No.3448, I MAIN, III BLOCK
GANDHINAGAR
BANGALORE.
(AMENDED AS PER ORDER OF THE
COURT DATED 22.2.2018)
... RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. V. SHIVAREDDY, HCGP FOR R2
MR. N. BALASUBRAMANINA, ADV., FOR R1
MR. GANAPATHI S. SHASTRI, ADV., FOR R3 & R4)
---
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED ORDERS DATED: 11.09.2017 AT ANNEXURE-J ISSUED
BY THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, 4TH CIRCLE, BANGALORE URBAN
DISTRICT, BANGALORE & ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Mr.Vasudeva Iyengar K.T, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.V.Shivareddy, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.2.
Mr.Ganapathi S. Shastri, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3
3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia has assailed the validity of the order dated 11.09.2017 passed by the District Registrar.
4. Facts giving rise to filing of the petition briefly stated are that the petitioner claims to be a life member of respondent No.1-Society viz., the Hebbar Sri Vaishnava Sabha, which is a Society registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). In the communication dated 13.05.2014, the office bearers of the Respondent No.1-Sabha mentioned the term of the committee as five years instead of three years. On 01.06.2014, the election to Upasabha and Central Committee of respondent No.1-Sabha was conducted for the period of five years instead of three years. The respondent No.3 submitted a representation to the Registrar and thereafter approached this Court by filing a writ petition viz., W.P.No.10294/2016. A bench 4 of this Court by order dated 09.03.2017 directed the Registrar to consider the matter. The Registrar by an order dated 11.09.2017, on careful scrutiny of bye-laws of respondent No.1-Sabha held that the term of the committee is three years and not five years and directed respondent No.1 Sabha to conduct elections within two months.
5. The respondent No.1-Sabha challenged the aforesaid order in W.P.No.43563/2017 and sought stay of the order dated 11.09.2017. However, no stay was granted. However, on 09.11.2017, the petitioners who are office bearers of respondent No.1-Sabha without disclosing the factum of filing of W.P.No.43563/2016 filed this writ petition, in which an interim order was granted on 09.11.2017 that order dated 11.09.2017 shall not be given effect to.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent No.2 had no authority to set aside the election as the elections were held for a period of five 5 years. It is further submitted that bye-laws of the Society were amended and the term was extended to five years. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3 and 4 submitted that without amending the bye-laws, the election was held for five years and the respondent no.2 had participated in the process of election of the central committee. It is also submitted that it was necessary to obtain an approval under Section 10 of the Act before amending the bye- laws which has not been done. It is also submitted that respondent No.4 did not participate in the process of election as his nomination paper was rejected. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate submitted that prior approval for carrying out amendment in the bye-laws is required. It is also submitted that respondent No.3's nomination paper was rejected.
7. By way of rebuttal, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the entire process, by which the term of the Managing Committee was extended 6 from three to five years, the respondent Nos.3 to 4 participated and respondent No.4 has not only filed the nomination form but had contested the election and had lost the same. It is also urged that merely because nomination paper of respondent No.3 was rejected, it cannot be said that he did not participate in the election. In support of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decisions of the Supreme Court in 'CORPORATION OF CALCUTTA VS. MULCHAND AGARWALA', AIR 1956 SC 110 and 'STATE OF U.P. VS. MANBODHAN LAL SRIVASTAVA', AIR 1957 SC 912. Lastly, it is urged that extended term of the committee that is five years in any case shall come to an end on 24.05.2019.
8. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and in the fact situation of the case as well as taking into account the fact that the term of five years of the members of the Society shall come to an end on 24.05.2019, it is apposite that 7 process of election in the Society is set forth in motion. In view of the dispute between the rival factions in the Society with regard to the term of the office bearers of the Society, I deem it appropriate to direct the Registrar of Societies, Government Of Karnataka to appoint an Administrator within a period of one month from today for conducting free and fair elections of respondent No.1-Sabha. The Administrator shall bear in mind the order passed by the Registrar of the Societies dated 11.09.2017 and shall take a decision with regard to term of the office bearers of the Society and shall notify the election program and shall conclude the process of elections of the respondent No.1-Sabha on or before 23.05.2019.
With the aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE SS