Judgment :- Common Order: 1. W.P.Nos.20051 & 28544/2007: Petitioner seeks Writ of Mandamus to suspend the Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent in Proceedings No.63503/G2/06 dated 05. 2007 ordering that the present office bearers can continue till the election of office bearers pending disposal of the appeal before the 4th Respondent. 2. Challenging the impugned proceedings of the 1st Respondent in Na.Ka. No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. 2007, granting approval for the appointment of Kannan as Secretary, W.P.No.28544/2007 has been filed. 3. Since, all the three Writ Petitions are filed with regard to approval of appointment of Secretary in the disputed Vallalar Arivalayam Primary School and involve common questions, all three Writ Petitions were taken up together and shall stand disposed of by this common order. 4. For convenience, partiesare referred as per their array in W.P.No.20051/2007. 5. Brief facts which led to the filing of both Writ Petitions are as follows:- .(i) Petitioner is the Secretary of Vallalar Illam which is a registered society formed by father of the Petitioner in the year 1967 registered in the District Registrars Office, Krishnagiri. The object of the Society is to educate the destitute children irrespective of caste, community, religion etc. and the Society is governed by bye-laws and regulations. .(ii) Krishnagiri Registration District was bifurcated into two Registration Districts in 1982. While formation of District Registrar Office at Dharmapuri, the above said Societys records have been transferred to the new Registration District of Dharmapuri. The said Society was renewed upto the financial year 2002-2003 and has to be renewed subsequent financial year 2003-2004. (iii) At that stage, 2nd Respondent who is the member of the Society has submitted Form VII on 29. 2004 stating that he is Secretary of the Society and insisted the administration to honour his Form VII and the renew the Society for the year 2003-2004. Whereas, another member of the Society has submitted application under Form VII stating that he is the Secretary of that Society and requested to renew the Society. .(iv) District Registrar and the Registrar of the Society, Dharmapuri conducted an enquiry with Markatham, the President of the Society on 05. 2006. Since the 4th Respondent is not a proper person of the Society, his Form VII was not honoured and approved by the District Registrar, Dharmapuri. .(v) Writ Petitioner G. Athiyaman has also filed Form VII stating that Special General Body Meeting was held on 21. 2006. Since the 4th Respondent is not a proper person of the Society, his Form VII was not honoured and approved by the District Registrar, Dharmapuri. .(v) Writ Petitioner G. Athiyaman has also filed Form VII stating that Special General Body Meeting was held on 21. 2005. Through that Meeting 2nd Respondent was dismissed from the Society and Athiyaman was elected as Secretary to the Society. District Registrar conducted an enquiry on 15. 2006 with Krishnan who is the member of the Society who had stated that 21 days prior notice was not given. Hence, his Form VII filed by Athiyaman was also not honoured. .(vi) Both 2nd Respondent and Athiyaman (Writ Petitioner) have preferred an appeal before 3rd Respondent. 3rd Respondent in its order No.63503/G2/06 dated 5. 2007 set aside the order of 1st Respondent and directed the 2nd Respondent to continue in the post of Secretary of the Society which is challenged in W.P.No.20051/2007. (vii) In W.P.No.20051/2007, Court has granted status quo on 16. 2007. Subsequent to the order of the Court, 1st Respondent has taken steps to appoint the 2nd Respondent as Secretary and passed orders on 16. 2007. After the receipt of status quo order, DEEO has recalled its order dated 12.06.2007 and appointed the Petitioner as Secretary in its order dated 07. 2007. While that being so, in its order dated 28. 2007, DEEO has revoked the appointment of the Petitioner and appointed the 2nd Respondent Kannan as Secretary which is the subject matter of challenge in W.P.No.28544/2007. .6. W.P.No.34949/2007: .Second Respondent – Kannan was appointed as Secretary of Vellalar School which is an aided school for the period from 01.04.2007 to 31.05.2010. Based on the order of the status quo passed in W.P.No.20051/2007, approval granted for appointment of Kannan as Secretary was cancelled in Na.Ka.No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. 2007. By the same Proceedings, approval was granted for appointment of Writ Petitioner Athiyaman as Secretary. Proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. 2007 is the subject matter of challenge in W.P.No.34949/2007. 7. Respondents 1,3 and 4 have filed counter stating that Petitioner Adhiyaman is not an approved or authorized Secretary of the Society. Meeting conducted by the Petitioner is not proper one and it was defective one. As per the Society rules 21 days prior notice is mandatory to the members. 2007 is the subject matter of challenge in W.P.No.34949/2007. 7. Respondents 1,3 and 4 have filed counter stating that Petitioner Adhiyaman is not an approved or authorized Secretary of the Society. Meeting conducted by the Petitioner is not proper one and it was defective one. As per the Society rules 21 days prior notice is mandatory to the members. 3rd Respondent has passed an order based on the averments in the Petition and remarks of the 1st Respondent. Resolutions dated 04. 2004 and 21. 2004 are not acceptable and therefore, the same was rejected. 3rd Respondent has not appointed any new Secretary and ordered to continue the last Secretary until new Secretary takes charge through new election. 8. Second Respondent has filed counter stating that without taking any steps and follow up action, Writ Petitioner has filed the Writ Petitions 20051 & 28544/2007. After the orders passed by the 3rd Respondent, Education department has approved the Second Respondent as Secretary cum Correspondent and there is no error in the order passed by the 3rd Respondent. 9. Mr. V. Raghavachari, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that 3rd Respondent cannot deal with the matter and hold as to who is the Secretary and therefore, the order of 3rd Respondent dated 05. 2007 is arbitrary and unjust. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would further submit that 3rd Respondent has acted beyond the powers vested on him in deciding as to who is the Secretary of the Society and the findings of the 3rd Respondent is malafide and against the documentary proof. 10. Mr. S. Mani, learned counsel for the 2nd Respondent contended that when the 3rd Respondent has passed the order directing the 2nd Respondent to continue in the post and with passing of order of status quo as on 16. 2007, 2nd Respondent has become Secretary of the Society and he continued in the same position. Learned counsel for the 2nd Respondent further contended that when the Writ Petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Government and when the appeal is pending, Writ Petitioner is not justified in invoking Writ jurisdiction. It was further submitted that there is a clear finding by the 1st Respondent that the meeting convened by the Writ Petitioner does not satisfy the mandatory requirements and therefore, Writ Petitioner cannot be approved as Secretary and therefore, the impugned order Na.Ka.No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. It was further submitted that there is a clear finding by the 1st Respondent that the meeting convened by the Writ Petitioner does not satisfy the mandatory requirements and therefore, Writ Petitioner cannot be approved as Secretary and therefore, the impugned order Na.Ka.No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. 2007 is liable to be set aside. 11. Mr. N. Senthilkumar, learned AGP has submitted that when the Writ Petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Government during the pendency of appeal, Writ Petitioner is not entitled to maintain the Writ Petitions. Learned AGP would further submit that 3rd Respondent has only permitted the 2nd Respondent to continue in the Secretary post until the date on which new Secretary takes charge and the order of the 3rd Respondent is in accordance with the rules. .12. Vallalar Illam is a registered Society formed by late M.G. Swamy, the father of the Petitioner and 2nd Respondent in the year 1967. The object of the Society is to educate the destitute children irrespective of caste, community, religion etc. Society is governed by bye-laws and regulations. Society consists of President, Secretary, Treasurer and six Committee Members. There are seven educational institutions under the control of the Society. All the institutions are under the management of Vallalar Illam and Government aided institutions. Writ Petitioner was appointed as Secretary-cum-Correspondent to the schools viz. (1) Vallalar Arivalayam Primary School, Nattanmaipuram, Dharmapuri; (2) Vallalar Arivalayam Nursery and Primary School, Nattanmaipuram, Dharmapuri; (3) Vallalar Arivalayam Matriculation School, Valluvar Nagar, Dharmapuri. Second Respondent has been appointed as Secretary and Correspondent to the schools viz. (1) Vallalar Arivalayam Middle School, Kurichi Nagar, Dokupothanalli post, Dharmapuri; (2) Vallalar Destitute Home, Kurinji Nagar, Dokupothanalli post, Dharmapuri; (3) Vallalar Juvenile Home, Kurinji Nagar, Dokupothanalli post, Dharmapuri; (4) Vallalar Arivalayam Nursery and Primary School, Kadathur. 13. Both Writ Petitioner as well as the 2nd Respondent filed Form VII for the Society. The dispute is in respect of Secretary ship of the society. 14. As pointed out earlier, 2nd Respondent filed Form-VII stating that he has been elected as Secretary of the said school and requested to register Form-VII and renew the registration of the Society for 2003-2004. First Respondent-Dy. Registrar has not honoured Form-VII filed by the 2nd Respondent Kannan. 15. As noted earlier, Writ Petitioner also filed Form-VII stating that he was elected as Secretary to the Society. On enquiry, Dy. First Respondent-Dy. Registrar has not honoured Form-VII filed by the 2nd Respondent Kannan. 15. As noted earlier, Writ Petitioner also filed Form-VII stating that he was elected as Secretary to the Society. On enquiry, Dy. Registrar found that 21 days prior notice was not given to the members properly and mandatory requirements of Society Registration Act in issuance of notice or intimation before the date of meeting was not satisfied. Pointing out Sections 25, 26 and 28 have not been followed and therefore, the meeting convened by the Writ Petitioner is invalid. By the order dated 09.01.2007, first Respondent declined to accept Form-VII filed by the Writ Petitioner. On that ground, first Respondent has not honoured Form-VII filed by the Writ Petitioner. .16. First Respondent has passed the following order:- .TAMIL 17. By the order dated 05. 2007, third Respondent-Inspector General of Registration has set aside the order of 1st Respondent and directed the existing Secretary i.e. 2nd Respondent Kannan to convene the meeting for holding fresh elections. Third Respondent observed that functioning and administration of the school would be affected, if the school is to remain without Secretary. Third Respondent further observed that when the Dy. Registrar had not received Form-VII, first Respondent ought to have directed the existing Secretary to continue in the position. The relevant portion of the 3rd Respondent dated 05. 2007 reads as under:- 18. As against the above said order, Writ Petitioner has filed an appeal on 21.05.2007. If the Writ Petitioner is aggrieved by the above order, it is for the Writ Petitioner to urge the contentious points in the said appeal pending before the Government. Writ petitioner cannot resort to parallel proceedings one before the Government and another before the High Court. In view of the efficacious alternative remedy, Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner is not maintainable. 19. Learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner mainly contended that notwithstanding the pendency of the appeal, order of 3rd Respondent appointing the 2nd Respondent as Secretary has caused serious prejudice to the Petitioner and therefore, Writ Petition is well maintainable. 120. As pointed out earlier, solely keeping in view the interest of the Society, for proper administration and functioning of the school, 3rd Respondent has passed an order directing continuation of the 2nd Respondent as Secretary. 120. As pointed out earlier, solely keeping in view the interest of the Society, for proper administration and functioning of the school, 3rd Respondent has passed an order directing continuation of the 2nd Respondent as Secretary. The impugned order does not purport to appoint the 2nd Respondent as the Secretary and W.P.No.20051/2007 is liable to be dismissed and the order of status quo already granted is liable to be vacated. 121. Learned counsel for the 2nd Respondent submitted that based on the order (dated 07.05.2007), subsequent election has been held for the year 2007-2010 and the same has also been filed by the 2nd Respondent i.e. Form-VII before the 1st Respondent and because of the order of status quo in the Writ Petition, 1st Respondent has not passed any order. Since the appeal is said to have been preferred before the Government, subsequent election would be subject to the disposal of the appeal by the Government. 122. Based on the order of the 3rd Respondent dated 07.05.2007, second Respondent was approved as Secretary by the District Elementary Educational Officer (DEEO) on 06.06.2007, whereas the order of status quo was granted on 11.06.2007. Therefore, the order of status quo as on 11.06.2007 would only amount to endorsing the order of DEEO recognizing the 2nd Respondent as Secretary. Misconstruing the order of status quo, DEEO appears to have cancelled the order dated 06. 2007. .23. In W.P.No.20051/2007, order of status quo was passed on 16. 2007. Based on the order of status quo, District Elementary Education Officer (DEEO) by the order dated 02.07.2007 has approved the Writ Petitioner as Secretary and cancelled the order dater 06.06.2007 recognizing the 2nd Respondent as Secretary. 2nd Respondent Kannan was ordered to be continued as Secretary by the order of 3rd Respondent dated 05. 2007. The order of status quo (dated 16. 2007) passed in W.P.No.20051/2007 would only mean that the 2nd Respondent Kannan to continue as the Secretary. Therefore, the order dated 02.07.2007 was rightly cancelled by the impugned order Na.Ka. No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. 2007, which is the subject matter of challenge in W.P.No.28544/2007. Therefore, W.P.No.28544/2007 is liable to be dismissed. 124. Based on the order of status quo, DEEO has again passed an order Na.Ka.No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. 2007 cancelling the earlier order dated 28. 2007 and restoring the order dated 02.07.2007 thereby approving the appointment of Writ Petitioner as Secretary. No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. 2007, which is the subject matter of challenge in W.P.No.28544/2007. Therefore, W.P.No.28544/2007 is liable to be dismissed. 124. Based on the order of status quo, DEEO has again passed an order Na.Ka.No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. 2007 cancelling the earlier order dated 28. 2007 and restoring the order dated 02.07.2007 thereby approving the appointment of Writ Petitioner as Secretary. This order is not in consonance with the order passed by the 3rd Respondent dated 07.05.2007 and therefore, Na.Ka.No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. 2007 is liable to be set aside and W.P.No.34949/2007 is to be allowed. 125. W.P. No.20051/2007: TAMIL In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed with the following directions:- "As directed in the order of DEEO dated 28. 2007, second Respondent Kannan shall continue as the Secretary. "His continuation as Secretary is till the conclusion of the appeal pending before the 4th Respondent and subject to the result of the appeal. "Consequently, connected M.Ps. are closed. "No costs. 26. W.P.No.28544/2007: In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected M.P. is closed. 27. W.P.No.34949/2007: In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed and the Proceedings of the DEEO in Na.Ka.No.1987/A1/06 dated 28. 2007 is set aside. Consequently connected M.P is closed. No costs. "Fourth Respondent shall complete the appeal preferred by the Writ Petitioner [G. Athiyaman] as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Add in Para – 14 : Pointing out Sections 25, 26 and 28 have not been followed and therefore, the meeting convened by the Writ Petitioner is invalid. By the order dated 09.01.2007, first Respondent declined to accept Form-VII filed by the Writ Petitioner. Add in Para – 16: Writ Petitioner cannot resort to parallel proceedings one before the Government and another before the High Court. Para – 18(A): Learned counsel for the 2nd Respondent submitted that based on the order (dated 07.05.2007), subsequent election has been held for the year 2007-2010 and the same has also been filed by the 2nd Respondent i.e. Form-VII before the 1st Respondent and because of the order of status quo in the Writ Petition, 1st Respondent has not passed any order. Since the appeal is said to have been preferred before the Government, subsequent election would be subject to the disposal of the appeal by the Government. Since the appeal is said to have been preferred before the Government, subsequent election would be subject to the disposal of the appeal by the Government. Para – 18(B): Based on the order of the 3rd Respondent dated 07.05.2007, second Respondent was approved as Secretary by the District Elementary Educational Officer (DEEO) on 06.06.2007, whereas the order of status quo was granted on 11.06.2007. Therefore, the order of status quo as on 11.06.2007 would only amount to endorsing the order of DEEO recognizing the 2nd Respondent as Secretary. Misconstruing the order of status quo, DEEO appears to have cancelled the order dated 06. 2007.