K.Rajan vs The Inspector Of General Of ... on 17 March, 2017

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

K.Rajan vs The Inspector Of General Of ... on 17 March, 2017

Bench: Huluvadi G.Ramesh

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :  17.03.2017
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.HULUVADI G.RAMESH, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN

W.P.No.6604 of 2017

K.Rajan								.. Petitioner 

Vs.

1   The Inspector of General of Registration  
     No.100,   Santhome High Road 
     Chennai - 600 028.

2   South Indian Film Chamber of Commerce  
     T.R. Sundaram Avenue,  No.605  
     Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 006.

3   Retd. Justice Hari Paranthaman
     Election Observer,
     No.2,  1st Main Road,  Kamaraj Nagar  
     Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai - 600 041.			.. Respondents 
 
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to instruct the 2nd respondent to suitably amend Rule 8(1) of the Memorandum and Rules of South Indian Film Chamber of Commerce with regard to voting by authorized representative or Proxy voting for the post of Officer Bearers and Executive Committee.

For Petitioner
:
Mr.R.Gandhi, Sr.Counsel
for Mr.B.Ravi Raja

For Respondents
:
Mr.M.K.Subramanian
Government Pleader
for 1st respondent 

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Acting Chief Justice) Mr.M.K.Subramanian, learned Government Pleader takes notice for the first respondent.

2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to instruct the 2nd respondent to suitably amend Rule 8(1) of the Memorandum and Rules of South Indian Film Chamber of Commerce with regard to voting by authorized representative or Proxy voting for the post of Officer Bearers and Executive Committee.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a member of the second respondent/South Indian Film Chamber of Commerce. It is his plea that the annual election of office bearers is scheduled to be held on 26.3.2017. It is alleged that a provision has been made for exercise of voting rights of member through authorized representative or proxy voting. The petitioner claims that the same has been deprecated by the Lodha Committee as well as the Delhi High Court in Delhi & District Cricket Association v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, 2017 SCC Online Del 6827. The main grievance of the petitioner is that election should be held without proxy voting and he restricts the relief sought to that extent.

4. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we would like to observe that the specific grievance of the petitioner against permitting exercise of voting rights of member through authorized representative or proxy voting can also be taken note of by the Election Observer appointed in this regard.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.7087 and 7088 of 2017 are closed.

(H.G.R., ACJ.) (T.K.R., J.) 17.03.2017 Index : No Internet : Yes sasi To:

1 The Inspector of General of Registration No.100, Santhome High Road Chennai - 600 028.

2 The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hari Paranthaman (Retired Judge of Madras High Court) Election Observer, No.2, 1st Main Road, Kamaraj Nagar Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai - 600 041.

HULUVADI G.RAMESH,ACJ.

AND RMT.TEEKA RAMAN,J.

(sasi) W.P.No.6604 of 2017 17.03.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court