Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

16. In Writ Petition No. 1136/1992, one Lahudas Sambhaji Karad contended that he had paid the enrolment fees of Rs. 200/- on 4-2-1991 and that this was done in pursuance of the order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner. He further contended that he had become member on the basis of the resolution approved at the meeting of the Governing Council on 19-2-1992 and hence the Joint Charity Commissioner had no authority to issue directions to the society to rely on the list of 483 members. He was not given notice of that proceeding and hence the order of the Joint Charity Commissioner in Application No. 3/1992 was not tenable and deserved to be set aside. In this writ petition also, practically the same nature of reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents Nos. 6 and 7 Halge and Deshmukh. They have challenged the list of 834 members and the so-called story of the meeting of the Governing Council on 19-2-1992,

37. It may be pointed out that none of the members listed in the list of 834 members has filed affidavit to show that he has not paid the contribution or that he has not enrolled himself as a member. On the other hand, in Writ Petition No. 1136/1992, Lahudas Sambhaji Karad, who is shown at serial No. 412, in the original list at Exh. D in the said petition, has come forth with an allegation that he has been deprived of casting vote; that Joint Charity Commissioner did not make him party and that he was required to file a petition for exercise of his right to vote. If it was contended on behalf of petitioner that the membership was of 834 members, it was bounden duty of the Joint Charity Commissioner to have issued notices to the duly enrolled members or at least to some of them to find out as to whether the newly added members were really enrolled. In the absence of such notice, the finding of the Joint Charity Commissioner stands vitiated.