Allahabad High Court
Shri Ram Leela Samiti Baralokpur Theu ... vs State Of U.P. Thru Principal Secry Lko. ... on 26 July, 2023
Author: Piyush Agrawal
Bench: Piyush Agrawal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:149116 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 43765 of 2004 Petitioner :- Shri Ram Leela Samiti Baralokpur Theu Secry P.K. Dwivedi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Principal Secry Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed the following prayer:
"(i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondents to consider the renewal of the Registration of the petitioner Society, as has been prayed by the letter dated 14.11.2003 and 20.9.1996, and allow this writ petition.
(ii) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the respondents which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
(iii) To award the cost of the writ petitioner to the petitioner."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was granted registration on 25.9.1996 and thereafter the registration was renewed from time to time. The petitioner moved an application for renewal of his licence, but the matter was kept pending. The petitioner moved subsequent applications for renewal, but was not decided yet. The petitioner press the applications pending before the respondent authorities dated 14.11.2003 and 23.08.1996, a direction may be issued for allowing the same. He further submits that as per provision provided under Section 3-A read with Section 5 of the Society Registration Act even after expiry of one year, the competent authority is authorized after payment of surcharges, the application for renewal can be considered. He submits that the same may be decided within time frame fixed by the Court.
4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel vehemently opposed the said prayer and submits that once an order dated 23.08.1996 (copy of which has been filed as Annexure 10) rejecting renewal of society subsist and the same has not been assailed, nothing on record even brought to show that the said order has been set aside by the competent Court. The prayer made by the petitioner cannot be granted. He prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
5. On perusal of the record, it shows that the registration has not been renewed since 1996, but applications have been filed, thereafter for renewal once the order of rejecting for renewal on 23.08.1996 subsist neither order for renewal can be passed nor the application filed under Section 3-A read with Section 5 of the Society Registration Act can be considered.
6. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed.
7. Petitioner may take all legal recourse which is available under the law.
Order Date :- 26.7.2023/A.N. Mishra