Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Jaipur District Cricket Association vs The Registrar Co-Operative Socities ... on 26 October, 2017
Author: M.N. Bhandari
Bench: M.N. Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6166 / 2017
Jaipur District Circket Association, K.L.saini Stadium, Mansarowar,
Jaipur Through Its Secretary Mohammad Iqbal, Aged 50 Years Son
of Late Umar Daraj Khan, R/o Plot No. 250, Jalupura, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Rajasthan, Sahakar
Bhawan, 22 Godown Circle, Jaipur.
2. The Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jaipur, At
Community Center, Dev Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur.
3. Shri Purushottam Sharma, Inquiry Officer and Inspector
(officiating), Office of the Registrar, Societies, Jaipur At
Community Centre, Dev Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur.
4. Shri Hashmat Alam (hony. Secretary), Meer Bagan Cricket Club,
Jaipur.
5. Shri Siddharth Sharma, Secretary, Golfers Cricket Club, Jaipur,
17, Chetak Marg, Near Police Memorial, Jaipur.
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravi Bhojak For Respondent(s) : Mr. Satyendra Meena for Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, Dy.GC Mr. Kamlakar Sharma, Sr. Adv. with Mrs.Alankrita Sharma & Mr. Madhusudan Raj Purohit _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI Judgment 26/10/2017 By this writ petition, a challenge is made to the orders dated 13th December, 2016 and dated 6th April, 2017. A further prayer is made to quash and set aside the notice dated 10 th April, 2017.
(2 of 9) [CW-6166/2017] Learned counsel for petitioner-association submits that a dispute pertaining to election of the Executive Committee of the Jaipur District Cricket Association can be challenged under Section 16 of the Rajasthan Sports Act, 2005 (for short "the Act of 2005"). The respondents have issued an order by invoking Section 23 of the Act of 2005 ignoring that a dispute pertaining to election can be subject matter of arbitration as per Section 16 of the Act of 2005 thus provision of Section 23 of the Act of 2005 has been wrongly invoked by the respondents.
It is further submitted that for the sake of argument, it is assumed that even Section 23 of the Act of 2005 is applicable then also order for inquiry can be in the manner provided under Rule 8 of the Rajasthan Sports Rules, 2004 (in short "the Rules of 2004"). As per Rule 8(1)(c), specific points, on which the inquiry is to be made and the period within which the inquiry is to be completed, have to be given. In the impugned order, no specific points have been narrated for conducting an inquiry. In view of the above also, impugned order deserves to be set aside as it is not in consonance to Rule 8 of the Rules of 2004.
Learned counsel for respondents has contested the writ petition. He submits that objections against holding of election were submitted on 9th September, 2016 i.e. prior to the election as election was commenced even before expiry of term and contrary to the directions given by the Lodha Committee constituted by the Apex Court. Many other objections were raised in that regard and were going in root of the management and otherwise affairs of the association. In view of the above, Section 16 of the Act of 2004 (3 of 9) [CW-6166/2017] has no application.
It is further submitted that an inquiry was directed as per Section 23 of the Act of 2005 and pursuant to the directions of this court, inquiry has already been conducted with a report. It would thus be futile to accept the argument raised by learned counsel for petitioner in reference to Section 23(1)(c) of the Act of 2005. Specific issues were before the inquiry officer and otherwise coming out from the objections /representations submitted by the respondents. The argument of the learned counsel for petitioner- association in reference to Section 23 may not be accepted now in the changed scenario and otherwise it would be nothing but to send the matter for post-decisional hearing. A prayer is accordingly to dismiss the writ petition.
I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The petitioner-association has challenged the order passed under Section 23 of the Act of 2005 in pursuance of the complaint/representation made by the respondents. A detailed representation was submitted by the respondents before the date of election. The representation is touching many issues. It includes issue in reference to the Bye-Laws and guidelines issued by the Lodha Committee. One of the issue is as to whether election can be conducted before expiry of term. The representation was submitted even after the election. The official respondents considered the objections submitted by the respondents and referred the matter for inquiry by invoking Section 23(1)(c) of the Act of 2005.
(4 of 9) [CW-6166/2017] Learned counsel for petitioner-association has questioned the order in reference to Section 16 of the Act of 2005. For ready reference, the provision aforesaid is quoted hereunder:
"16. Conciliation and Arbitration. - (1) If any dispute arises touching the constitution, management activity, election or claim to affiliation of any Sports Association, the same shall be resolved through conciliation and arbitration.
(2) The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Central Act No.26 of 1996), as amended from time to time, shall apply to the conciliation and arbitration proceedings, referred under sub-section (1)."
Two other provisions relevant to the issue are Sections 22 and 23 of the Act of 2005 thus they are also quoted hereunder for ready reference:
"22. Grounds for Disqualification. - (1) A Sports Association shall be liable to action on any of the following grounds:-
(a) If the Sports Association fails to maintain accounts and submit the same under Section 19 or fails to produce the same when called for inspection;
(b) If the Sports Association fails to hold elections in accordance with its bye-laws, or, as the case may be, when enjoined by the provisions of Chapter VII;
(c) If the Sports Association fails to carry out its obligations under Chapter VIII;
(d) If the Sports Association or any of its office Bearers or any other member of the Executive Body misappropriates the funds for his personal gains or mismanages the affairs of the Sports Association to give undue benefit to any other person;
(5 of 9) [CW-6166/2017]
(e) If the Sports Association is disaffiliated under Section 21.
(2) A State Level Sports Association may after giving opportunity of being heard, recommend to the Registrar that a District Level Sports Association affiliated to it may be disqualified if it -
(a) does not follow the directions of the State Level Sports Association in the matter of conducting tournaments and flouts its Regulations.
(b) does not pay the Affiliation fee.
(c) otherwise violates the provisions of its own registered bye-laws."
23. Inquiry.- (1) The Registrar may, -
(a) on the request of a State Level Sports Association, or
(b) on the request of not less than one tenth of the total members of a Sports Association, or
(c) on his own motion, hold an enquiry, either himself or by a person duly authorised by him.
(2) The Registrar or the person authorised by him shall, for the purpose of any inquiry, have all the powers to inspect records, direct production and take copy of any document of the concerned Sports Association for the purpose of the enquiry." Section 16 of the Act of 2005 provides for conciliation and arbitration if any dispute arises touching the constitution, management activity, election or claim to affiliation of any sports association. In case of a dispute, it should be referred to the Arbitrator and it would be pursuant to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Section 23 of the Act of 2005 provides for inquiry and it can be on the request of not less than one tenth of the total members of Sports Association or even on his own motion apart from request of the State Level Sports Association.
(6 of 9) [CW-6166/2017] Section 22 of the Act of 2005 provides for action, if association fail to hold election in accordance to the Bye-Laws, etc. The first question for my consideration is as to whether Section 23 of the Act of 2005 can be invoked on the objections raised by the respondents. It is no doubt true that objections/representations were initially submitted by the respondents before the election officer. Apart from many other issues, election was questioned even in reference to Bye-Laws and recommendation of the Lodha Committee because elections are alleged to have been held before completion of term of the committee. The representation was subsequently given when objections were not considered by the election officer. The Registrar took notice of the issues and made an order under Section 23(1)(c) of the Act of 2005.
The perusal of objections submitted prior to election and subsequently shows it to be on the issues which can be subject matter of Section 23 and for that, even reference of Section 22 would be relevant. Section 22(b) provides that if Sports Association fails to hold elections in accordance with Bye-Laws or as the case may be, when enjoined by the provisions of Chapter VII, the action can be taken. In the instant case, apart from many other objections, objection is regarding failure of the association to hold election in accordance with By-Laws and recommendation of the Lodha Committee after its nomination by the Apex Court has been revised. Hence, I do not find that issues raised by the respondents in reference to Section 16 of the Act of 2005 can be accepted. The issue pertaining to election can be raised under (7 of 9) [CW-6166/2017] Section 16 and under Section 22 as well. In view of the above, Section 23 can very well be invoked to conduct an inquiry into the matter. It is moreso when elections have been questioned alleging it to be in violation of the Bye-Laws thus it is covered by Section 22 of the Act of 2005.
The issue now comes as to whether order passed for causing inquiry is in consonance to the Rules of 2004. For ready reference, Rule 8 of the Rules of 2004 is quoted hereunder:
"8. Procedure for conduct of an inquiry.- (1) An order for conducting an inquiry under Section 23 shall, among other things, contain the following, namely:-
(a) name of the person authorized to conduct the enquiry;
(b) name of the Sports Association whose affairs are to be enquired into;
(c) specific point(s) on which the enquiry is to be made and the period within which the enquiry is to be completed and report is to be submitted to the Registrar;
(d) any other matter relating to the enquiry.
(2) A copy of an order for conducting an inquiry under section
23 shall be supplied to the affiliating Association to which the Association in respect of which the enquiry is being conducted, is affiliated.
(3) If the inquiry cannot be completed within the time specified in the order referred to in sub-rule (1), the person conducting the enquiry shall submit an interim report stating the reasons for failure to complete the enquiry and the Registrar, if he is satisfied, grant such an extension of time for completion of the inquiry, as he may deem necessary; or he may withdraw the inquiry from the officer to whom it is entrusted and hold the enquiry either himself or entrust it to such other person as he deems fit.
(8 of 9) [CW-6166/2017] (4) On receipt of the order referred to in sub-rule (1), the persons authorized to conduct the inquiry shall proceed to examine the relevant books of accounts and other documents in possession of the sports Association or any of its officers, employees, or members of the Association in regard to the transactions and the working of the Association as he deems necessary for the conduct of such inquiry. (5) The person authorized to conduct the inquiry shall submit his report to the Registrar on all the points mentioned in the order referred to in sub-rule (1). The reports shall contain his findings and the reasons thereof, supported by such documentary or other evidence as recorded or obtained by him during the course of the inquiry.
(6) After receiving his report, the Registrar shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the Association concerned which may also file a reply in writing.
(7) The Registrar, if satisfied by reply given by the concerned Sports Association may pass order to file the notice or any call for the records of the Association for further satisfaction of impose disqualifications under the Ordinance. (8) If the Registrar passes an order imposing any disqualifications provided under the Ordinance, he shall record the reasons for doing so."
The perusal of the order does not reveal it to be in consonance to Rule 8(1)(c) of the Rules of 2004. Specific points of inquiry are to be made, which does not exist in the order for inquiry. In the similar circumstances, the Division Bench of this court in the case of Rajasthan Tennis Association through its President Vs. Rajasthan Cooperative Societies & Ors., reported in WLC 2008 (2) 27 held inquiry to be not in consonance to Rule 8 of the Rules of 2004. Therein also, specific (9 of 9) [CW-6166/2017] points were not framed.
It is true that inquiry proceeded during pendency of the writ petition but if it is not in consonance to Rule 8 of the Rules of 2004, then sanctity cannot be attached to it even if it was allowed by this court and otherwise it was by an interim measure. When Rule 8 mandates for framing of the specific points then order dated 13th December, 2016 for causing inquiry cannot be allowed to stand and is accordingly set aside with liberty to the competent authority to order for inquiry in consonance to Rule 8 of the Rules of 2004. The direction for inquiry should be after framing of the specific points as provided under Rule 8(1)(c) of the Rules of 2004 and therein, care would also be taken to comply other clauses of Rule 8 of the Rules of 2004. The judgment of this court would not come in the way in holding fresh inquiry, rather, it would be caused on the specific points framed by the authority. The parties would be at liberty to raise all the issues before the officer nominated for the inquiry and thereupon finding on the issues would be recorded as a consequence thereof. The action on the representation of the non-petitioners would be taken within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid.
(M.N. BHANDARI)J. FRBOHRA