JUDGMENT 1. 1. This appeal has been preferred by Ajmer Branch of All India Women's Conference having its head office at New Delhi, challenging the order of the learned Single Judge, which had been pleased to dismiss the writ petition preferred by the appellant. 2. The appellant had filed the writ petition challenging the order passed by the Dy. Director, Short Stay Home at Ajmer, who had written a letter to the main branch of All India Women's Conference at New Delhi, stating that the Ajmer Branch of All India Women's Conference had been black-listed by the Vigilance Division of the Central Social Welfare Board in 1992 for mis-utilizing the Government grants. It further noted that the Ajmer Branch of All India Women's Conference having been black-listed, no further grant of this N.G.O. will be given under the programme of Central Social Welfare Board including the Short Stay Home. This letter was under challenge by the petitioner/appellant herein before the learned Single Judge as it was noted that the petitioner-appellant inspite of its blacklisting by order of the Central Social Welfare Board way back in the year 1992, was still availing the grant from the main branch of All India Women's Conference, situated at New Delhi, obviously, because it was not made aware of the status of the appellant-Branch, which had been black-listed. The writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. 3. Challenging the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge, it was submitted by counsel for the appellant-Ajmer Branch of All India Women's Conference that the respondent No. 3 Dy. Director of Central Social Welfare Board as also the respondent No. 4 President of the All India Women's Conference at New Delhi ought to have been held competent to withdraw the grant being availed by the appellant, as they were not competent authorities to pass such order. In reply to the same it was submitted by counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 that the Central Social Welfare Board had passed an order way back in the year 1992 itself, black-listing the appellant-Branch of the All India Women's Conference at New Delhi and it had merely carried out the order of stopping the grant to the appellant. 3 & 4 that the Central Social Welfare Board had passed an order way back in the year 1992 itself, black-listing the appellant-Branch of the All India Women's Conference at New Delhi and it had merely carried out the order of stopping the grant to the appellant. In support of this submission, they have annexed the order of the Central Social Welfare Board alongwith the reply, by which an order regarding black-listing of the appellant-Branch had been passed, recording that it had mis-utilized the fund. This order was passed after issuing a show cause notice to the appellant-Branch. On this aspect, learned counsel for the appellant had contended that the appellant-Organization is not aware of any order of the Central Social Welfare Board. But we are unable to accept this contention as the show cause notice had been issued to the appellant-Branch, after which the order of the Central Social Welfare Board was passed black-listing it. If the appellant was aggrieved by this order, it was open for it to either challenge the same or represent before the Central Social Welfare Board against the order if it had any grievance against the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 that respondent No. 3 had written a letter to the respondent No. 4 for stopping the grant, in that event, the Central Social Welfare Board could have passed an order either in favour of the appellant or against it. But the appellant-Branch appears to have ignored the order of the Central Social Welfare Board, which was convenient to them, as they were taking benefit of the ignorance of the All India Women's Conference, which was unaware of the order passed by the Central Social Welfare Board. Counsel for the respondents has still submitted that no such order by the Central Social Welfare Board was passed against the appellant-Branch. Even if we are not aware of the correctness of this statement made before this Court, then it is only for the Central Social Welfare Board.to examine this matter and come to a conclusion in this regard. Counsel for the respondents has still submitted that no such order by the Central Social Welfare Board was passed against the appellant-Branch. Even if we are not aware of the correctness of this statement made before this Court, then it is only for the Central Social Welfare Board.to examine this matter and come to a conclusion in this regard. The appellant-Branch, therefore, will be at liberty to represent before the Central Social Welfare Board with a copy to the All India Women's Conference Branch at New Delhi and it is for the Central Social Welfare Board to take a just and suitable decision in regard to the appeal/representation of the appellant-Organization in regard to it's claim for the grant. 4. Insofar as order of the learned Single Judge is concerned, we do not find any infirmity in the same in the existing facts and circumstances of the case.The appeal, therefore, stands dismissed at the admission stage itself.Appeal Dismissed. *******