Karnataka High Court
Mrs R Stella M.A. M.Ed., vs District Registrar Bangalore Urban on 22 January, 2009
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE a DATED THIS THE 225° DAY OF JANUARY 2009 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE 'RAM MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION } No. | 1902 oF 2006 (Gm -KSR) BETWEEN : MRS. R STELLA, IMA., M.Ed, W/O. LTE MR, KANICK DAS,- AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, . PRESIDENT, ©. . Me BANGALORE BHARATI SOCIAL SERVICES LEAGUE® 9 91/1, COLES ROAD, FRAZER TOWN BANGALORE . (BY SRL V A MOHAN RANGAM, ADV) AND: 1 DEPUTY REGISTRAR, - OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, LEGAL CELL, ALI ASKER ROAD, BANGALORE- 1. ~PUTTARAJU, EDUCATION OFFICER Of/o. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, CENTRAL JUNIOR COLLEGE BUILDING, K G ROAD CIRCLE, BANGALORE --2. bk wo . PETITIONER 3 THE SECRETARY, -- KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, | M 8 BUILDINGS, BANGALORE. a 4 SMT. M ELIZABETH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, ©. W/O. LATE D J RAJ, a R/AT NO. 786, 9TH 'A' MAIN ROAD, INDIRANAGAR 1ST, STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 638. = Gr SMT. MILDRED SAMS -. W/0.T C.MURTEY | AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS _ HEAD MISTRESS, CARNGD> PRIMARY, SCHOOL, NO, 184, » ST. -PHRIS CHURCH: ROAD... FRAZER TOWN, B'LORE. - 6. SRI. ALFRED SAMS." S/O. LATE M F SAMS _NO. 5K, 672 STREET, _. ASHOKNAGAR, B'LORE-78 oe me ; ... RESPONDENTS - (BY SRL-R DEVDAS, AGA FOR R1 & 3) (BY SRL M-S PARTHASARATHI AND __ M P SRIKANTH, ADV FOR R4 & 6} THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES ~~ 296 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA . PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF THE 1ST _.. RESPONDENT DTD. 13.12.2005 VIDE ANNEXKURE-A AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING : | rd ORDER
The petitioner claiming tobe the President of. Bangalore Bharath Social Service "League, a society. registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration | Act, 1960, for short the Act and Rules, 1961, having presented to the District Registrar. of societies, the amendment. to Art.2(b)(i ) of thie Rules of the Society, was approved. by order . bearing ~No.AMR/ 171/2000- O1 on: 7.12.2900. Thereaerwards, respondents 4 to 6 filed a written representation to the District Registrar alleging that the petitioner did not occupy the post of _ President 'in accordance with Rule 2(b\(v) of the bye : laws: and 'that. the total number of members of the society were 66 as on 21.2.2000 whereas on 7.5.2000 a . it was reduced to 50 only, amongst other irregularities.
"The > District Registrar having considered the . representation, on 17.10.2002 instituted an enquiry : invoking Sec.25 of the Act by appointing PH Lakshminarayan Achar as the enquiry officer, who, it bt is said held an enquiry after extending "reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned . and. :
submitted a report, communicated | 'to tire petitioner. and respondents 4 to 6 under letter dated 4 it 1.05. That report was opposed . Dy. filing a "peply' of the petitioner. The District cgistrar by order dated 13.12.2005 Annexure A. accepted the 'Feport rescinded the order dated 7. 12. 2000 approving the amendment to the rules | and 5 revived ch Zid of the Rules of the society as existed prior to the amendment and further appointed the Education Officer, Bangalore North to os, condiict. the election to the governing body of the : society after fmalizing the list of the members.
on - The petitioner aggrieved by the said order
- 7 | preferred an appeal under Sec.9(3) and 10(3) of the Act te the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, for short KAT', . whence by order dated 10.1.2006 Annexure B though did not explicitly state that it did not have jurisdiction bd to interfere with the order of the District 'Registrar, passed under Sec.25 of the Act, nevertheles _ observed thus: "does not appear to i have any / jurisdiction to intervene at this "stage." | The KAT 7 perhaps at the instance of 'the petitioner inter preted | the word = 'tescind' - _to mean "not a * Gefasal' and accordingly, dismissed "the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Hence, this petition.
3. A hare 'perusal of the order dated 13.12.2005 Annexure- A of. the District Registrar discloses non application of mind over the power to review his order. I say $0 because admittedly the amendment to the . . "Art.2(b)@). of 'the Rules of the Society was approved on | 7.12.2000° by the District Registrar and the provisions _ of the Act "are not shown to provide an express power : 7 of review of the said order by the District Registrar. So a also, under Sec.25 of the Act, invoked for instituting an a enquiry by the District Registrar does not contemplate ye an enquiry into the earlier order passed by ihe | | District. Registrar. Therefore it was for the Depity Registrar to. ascertain his jurisdiction under the Act, in the matter, . although there was a written ; representation ; by -- respondents 4 to 6, members of the society that all was not well in the matter of the amendment to the rules of the Society. in other words, the Deputy Registrar without applying his mind to 'the fact, circumstances and to the jurisdiction vested in him under the Act set aside hi Ss earlier. an onder according approval to the amendment to the Rules of the Society, passed in the a year 2000, These ald many questions arise for decision . making by. the District Registrar.
. 4 Secondly, the order Annexure-A does not a aliimate consideration of the material placed before him a by the Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer's suggestion of certain measures to be adopted could not have been Jet
-W.P.18647 /2006 for a mandamus to the District a > Registrar to comply with the order dated 17.1.2006 by _ : holding elections to the office bearers of the said society.
mechanically accepted without assigning reasons. It is elsewhere held - eo "The giving of reasons in support of their * ° conclusions by judicial, and: quasi-judicial :
authorities when exercising initial jurisdiction is essential for various "reasons. 7 First -it is calculated to prevent unconscious unfairness or arbitrariness in reaching the conclusions, The very search for reasons. will put the. authority on the alert ond 1ainimise. the chances of unconscicns infiltration of personal bias or unfairness in the conchusion."
Failure to assign ~ reasons tantamounts to denial of justice. .
5. A person claiming to be a member of the Bangalore Bizarath Social Service League, has preferred In view of the conclusion that the order dated 13.12.2005 Annexure A of the District Registrar, is not a a speaking order and needs to be redone, the relief is --
rendered infructuous. cen The writ petition is allowed 'and order impugned -- Annexure A dated 13.12. 2005 is s quashed, without going into the merit or demérit of r the "contention over the jurisdiction of the KAT to entertain "an appeal of the nature filed wy ihe petitioner and keeping that question open, - the _ proceeding in remitted to the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Legal Cell, Bangalore, for consideration afresh and to pass orders in accordance with law, in the light of the observations on "supra, and after extending reasonable opportunity of | hearing te the parties, in any event within three months
- from: the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Sd/~ csg