Shree Rajasthan Vishram Bhavan And Anr vs Shri. Shiv Kumar Agarwala And Ors on 13 October, 2014

[Cites 1, Cited by 2]

Meghalaya High Court

Shree Rajasthan Vishram Bhavan And Anr vs Shri. Shiv Kumar Agarwala And Ors on 13 October, 2014

Bench: T Nandakumar Singh

      THE HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
                REVIEW PETN. No.13/2014
                  IN WP(C)No.212/2014
1.    Shree Rajasthan Vishram Bhavan,
      Luckier Road, Shillong-793002,
      District East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya.

2.    The Secretary,
      Executive Committee,
      Shree Rajasthan Vishram Bhawan,
      Luckier Road, Shillong-793002,
      District East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya.               :::: Review Petitioners

                    -Vs-

1.    Shri. Shiv Kumar Agarwala,
      S/o (L) Rukmanand, Mandawewala,
      Garikhana, Shillong,
      District: East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya.

2.    Shri. Sitaram Agarwala,
      S/o (L) Nandlal Ghoriwala, Qualapaty, Shillong,
      District: East Khasi Hills, Meghalaya.

3.    State of Meghalaya, represented by the
      Commissioner & Secretary Registration,
      Shillong.

4.    The Registrar of Societies,
      Government of Meghalaya,
      East Khasi Hills District, Shillong.         :::: Respondents

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T NANDAKUMAR SINGH For the Review Petitioners : Mr. MF Qureshi, Adv For the Respondents : Mr. KP Bhattacharjee, GA Date of hearing : 13.10.2014 Date of Judgment & Order : 13.10.2014 JUDGMENT AND ORDER(ORAL) Heard Mr. MF Quershi, learned counsel for the review petitioners and Mr. KP Bhattacharjee, learned GA appearing for the State respondents.

Page 1 of 4

2. On perusal of the review petition, it is very clear that the review petitioners i.e. appellants in Writ Appeal No.64/2014, had not correctly apprised the fact of the writ petition as well as the relief sought for in the writ petition i.e. WP(C)No.212/2014 before the Division Bench. No doubt, it is well settled that the writ petition does not lie against the order/resolution of the Registered Society. The writ petition i.e. WP(C)No.212/2014 is filed against the (1) The State of Meghalaya, represented by its Secretary & Commissioner (Registration), Shillong, (2) the Registrar of Societies, Government of Meghalaya, Shillong. (3) the Secretary, Executive Committee, Shree Rajasthan Vishram Bhawan, Luckier Road, Shillong, Meghalaya. One has to see the parties and the main relief sought for in the writ petition i.e. WP(C)No.212/2014 before considering the contention of the review petitioners that the writ petition i.e. WP(C)No.212/2014 is filed against the Registered Society and is not maintainable. The relief sought for in the writ petition i.e. WP(C)No.212/2014 is for setting aside the order dated 23.04.2014 (Annexure-VI to the writ petition) passed by the Registrar of Societies, Govt. of Meghalaya, Shillong and it reads as follows:-

"GOVERNMENT OF MEGHALAYA OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES, ETC, MEGHALAYA, SHILLONG.

No.13/66/81 Dated, Shillong, the 23rd April, 2014.

To, The Secretary, Shree Rajasthan Vishram Bhawan, Luckier Road, Shillong-793002.

Sub: Approval of the alteration/amendment made to the constitution vide Resolution dated 04-08-2013.

With reference to your letter dated 25th November, 2013, I am to inform you that the alteration/amendment made to your constitution vide resolution dated 04-08-2013 is hereby approved.

Page 2 of 4

This is for favour of your information.

Sd/-

(Abhishek Bhagotia, IAS) Registrar of Societies, Meghalaya, Shillong".

3. The writ petition i.e. WP(C)No.212/2014 is not against the order/resolution passed by the Registered Society. Once the impugned order passed by the Registrar of Societies, Govt. of Meghalaya, Shillong dated 23.04.2014 is set aside, consequences will be that the resolution passed by the Registered Society dated 04.08.2013 will not be effective. Learned counsel for the appellants has clearly misunderstood the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in two cases namely (i) Sabhajit Tewary v. Union of India & Ors: (AIR 1975 SC 1329 and (ii) Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology & Ors: (2002) 5 SCC 111. From the above factual matrix, it is crystal clear that WP(C)No.212/2014 is not the writ petition simplicitor filed against the Registered Society but the writ petition filed against the Govt. of Meghalaya and the Registrar of Societies, Govt. of Meghalaya impugning the order passed by the Registrar of Societies, Govt. of Meghalaya dated 23.04.2014. Therefore, in order to avoid the chaotic situation, this Court while passing the judgment and order dated 08.07.2014 in WP(C)No.212/2014 for setting aside the impugned order dated 23.04.2014 passed by the Registrar of Societies, Govt. of Meghalaya, simply mentioned the consequence that the impugned resolution of the General Body Meeting held on 04.08.2013 will be of no effect after setting aside the impugned order dated 23.04.2014 passed by the Registrar of Societies, Govt. of Meghalaya.

4. In the course of dictation of this judgment and order, Mr. MF Quershi, learned counsel for the review petitioners submits at the Bar that since the law is well settled regarding the point i.e. writ petition does not lie Page 3 of 4 against the order/resolution of the Registered Society but the writ petition will lie against the order of the Registrar of Societies, Govt. of Meghalaya and the State Govt., he is not pressing the present review petition and accordingly, this review petition is dismissed as not pressed.

JUDGE Lam Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Meghalaya High Court