Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Andhra Evangelical Lutheran Church vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 9 March, 2021
Author: M.Ganga Rao
Bench: M.Ganga Rao
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO
Writ Petition No. 5710 of 2021
ORDER:
The petitioner, a Society registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 bearing registration No.2/1932 dated 21.04.1932, filed this writ petition to declare the proceedings in letter No.E.1/269/2021 dated 02.02.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent, whereby the 3rd respondent - District Registrar, Guntur has given a reply to the legal notice issued under Section 80 of C.P.C. for renewal of the new Office bearers of the petitioner society stating that they do not have any supervision authority over societies as per Section 23 of the Society Act 35 of 2001, in the event of any dispute arising among the committee or the members of the society in respect of any matter relating to the affairs of the society, any member of the society may proceed with the dispute under the provision of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, or may file an application in the District Court concerned and the said Court shall after necessary inquiry pass such order as it may deem fit, as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001 (for short 'the Act, 2001').
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner intimated to the 3rd respondent about the completion of 50th 2 Biennial Convention to register the new Office Bearers on record vide communication dated 21.01.2021 (legal notice got issued by the petitioner by RPAD on 21.01.2021). In reply to the said legal notice, the 3rd respondent issued the impugned reply, which is illegal and arbitrary. The 3rd respondent is under statutory obligation to receive and record the new office bearers of the petitioner's society under Section 9 of the Act, 2001, but asking the petitioner to seek redressal in the Court of law under Section 23 of the Act vide impugned proceedings dated 02.02.2021, is illegal and arbitrary.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that it is the duty of the 3rd respondent authority to receive the intimation about election of new office bearers and annual general body meetings without going into the legality or otherwise of the elections and conventions and record the same under the provisions of Section 9 of the Act 2001, and communicate the same to the petitioner to perform day-to-day administrative affairs of the petitioner society as an authorized general body.
The learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that as per the provisions of Section 9 of the Act 2001, every society shall, within 15 days from the date on which the General Body meeting was held, furnish a list to the Registrar of Societies which shall contain the names and addresses of the members of the Managing Committee and 3 Office bearers entrusted with the management of the affairs of the Society. In the absence of any objections by any person, the 3rd respondent is bound to receive the list of Office Bearers on record under Section 9 of the Act. The 3rd respondent issued the impugned proceedings based on assumptions and presumptions and drove the petitioner to the Civil Court under Section 23 of the Act, 2001. But, it is the person who disputes the election has to approach the Court and not the petitioner society. Hence, the action of the 3rd respondent is illegal, arbitrary and amounts to abdication of discharge of his duties.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Cooperation would contend that the petitioner has not submitted any representation or application with regard to the conduct of Annual General Body meeting or election of new Office Bearers as required under the provisions of Section 9 of the Act, 2001 and only they got issued legal notice without any details of conducting elections of Annual General Body meeting or the names and addresses of the members of the Managing Committee. Hence, all the new office bearers are requesting the authorities to consider the representations submitted by them regarding filing of annual lists, filing of annual general meeting minutes, auditing reports, etc., to consider the new office bearers in lieu of former office bearers of AELC as per the LCM : 502 of A.E.L. Church. However, the 3rd respondent has considered the legal notice and issued the 4 impugned proceedings dated 02.02.2021, and there is no illegality in communicating the said proceedings stating that the respondent authorities have no supervision authority over societies as per Section 23 of the Act, 2001.
5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions of the learned counsel, and on perusal of the record, this Court, after perusal of the legal notice and the impugned reply notice, came to the conclusion that the petitioner has not submitted an application/ representation with full details, as required under the provisions of Section 9 of the Act, of newly elected Office bearers of the petitioner society in the Annual General Body meeting held as per the bye-laws of the society.
6. Hence, this Court, in the interest of justice, felt it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, giving liberty to the petitioner to file proper application as required under the provisions of Section 9 of the Act, 2001, giving full details for consideration of the 3rd respondent to record the same, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such application filed by the petitioner intimating about the conduct of Annual General Body meeting and election of the Office Bearers, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider the same without reference to the impugned reply notice dated 02.02.2021, on its own merits, as per law, if the society is on the live register maintained by 5 the 3rd respondent by informing regularly about conduct of the Annual General Body meetings and elected Office bearers of the society, as per bye-laws of the society. If such intimations were submitted by the petitioner as per law, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's application for recording the new office bearers and whose committee has been ratified by the outgoing committee as required under the provisions of Section 9 of the Act and pass a reasoned order and take appropriate action as per law and communicate the same to the petitioner, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of submission of the application/representation by the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
8. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO 09-03-2021 SPP/anr 6 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO Writ Petition No. 5710 of 2021 09-03-2021 SPP/anr