Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 646 (GAU)

Assam Flying Club v. State of Assam

2018-04-11

NELSON SAILO, UJJAL BHUYAN

body2018
JUDGMENT : Ujjal Bhuyan, J. 1. Heard Mr. S.S. Dey, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Senior Addl. Advocate General, Assam assisted by Mr. D. Nath, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 i.e., State of Assam in the Sports & Youth Welfare Department and its officials and Mr. P.K. Roy Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5. Assam Flying Club and its Honorary Secretary Shri Bikrom Singha Lahkar are the two appellants in this appeal. They are aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 04.04.2017, passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, being WP (C) No. 3218/2015, filed by the appellants as the writ petitioners, assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 27.05.2015, issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Sports & Youth Welfare Department directing that Sri Ranuj Barkotaky, ACS, Joint Director of Sports & Youth Welfare would act as in-charge of Assam Flying Club Ltd. as an interim arrangement till selection of Honorary Secretary or making of any other arrangement, with the further observation that there should be an enquiry either by the State Government or by filing appropriate complaint before the Upa Lokayaukta, Assam into the affairs of Assam Flying Club. 2. Case projected by the appellants before the learned Single Judge, as petitioners in the writ petition, was that Assam Flying Club was registered under the Assam Cooperative Societies Act, 1949 in the year 1958. Assam Flying Club (Club hereafter) was almost defunct for all these years till about the year 2009 for various reasons, including lack of funds. It was at that stage that a concerted attempt was made by several leading citizens who were associated with the Club to revive the Club. In this connection, the then Hon'ble Chief Minister of Assam also extended his helping hand. 3. As part of the revival process, an advertisement was issued by the Deputy Director, Sports & Youth Welfare, Assam on 3.9.2013 for appointment of Honorary Secretary of the Club under Clause 26(e) of its Byelaws. It was stated that appellant No. 2, who is the Accountable Manager of the College of Aeronautical Engineering, Guwahati had submitted application along with many others pursuant to such advertisement. Appellant No. 2 was selected for appointment as Honorary Secretary vide Government notification dated 07.10.2013. It was stated that appellant No. 2, who is the Accountable Manager of the College of Aeronautical Engineering, Guwahati had submitted application along with many others pursuant to such advertisement. Appellant No. 2 was selected for appointment as Honorary Secretary vide Government notification dated 07.10.2013. Appointment of appellant No. 2 as Honorary Secretary of the Club was challenged by respondent No. 5 before this Court by filing WP(C) No. 6809/2013 (Captain Ved Barua v. State of Assam). A Single Bench of this Court vide the judgment and order dated 21.02.2014 dismissed the writ petition. Learned Single Judge held that the assignment was only honorary without any remuneration and in the absence of any material disclosing arbitrary or colourable exercise of power, interference by the writ court would not be justified. Besides, it was also observed that going by the nature of the advertisement and appointment, it would not come within the domain of public employment. 4. Thereafter, respondent No. 5 preferred writ appeal before the Division Bench which was registered as Writ Appeal No. 102/2014 (Captain Ved Barua v. State of Assam). A Division Bench of this Court considered Clause 26(e) of the Byelaws of the Club and found that as per the said provision, Secretary was to be appointed by the State Government, who would enjoy all the privileges of a Director or ex-officio member on such terms and conditions, as determined by the State Government. Therefore, it was held that State Government was vested with the power to appoint the Secretary on such terms and conditions, as determined by the State Government 5. The Division Bench further held that a conjoint reading of Clause 26(e) of the Bye-laws, advertisement dated 03.09.2013 and the Government notification dated 7.10.2013 would go to show that the selection and appointment of Honorary Secretary was made by the Government of Assam and it was an executive decision of the State. It was further held that though the appointment of Secretary of the Club might not fall within the domain of public appointment stricto senso nonetheless, it was a recruitment made by the Government. Therefore, it had all the trappings of public employment and would have to be judged from that perspective. Division Bench found that out of the 19 applications, appellant No. 2 was found to be the most suitable candidate on the basis of paper sorting. Therefore, it had all the trappings of public employment and would have to be judged from that perspective. Division Bench found that out of the 19 applications, appellant No. 2 was found to be the most suitable candidate on the basis of paper sorting. Observing that when an appointment partakes the character of public appointment, such appointment must meet the minimum standard of fairness and transparency. In other words, such an appointment must be in conformity with the requirement of Article 14 of the Constitution. Sorting of papers and thereafter taking the view that one of the candidates was the most suitable cannot be treated as an acceptable selection procedure in conformity with Article 14. Therefore, it was held that selection of appellant No. 2 was not a valid selection in the eye of law, as there was no comparative assessment of the suitability of the candidates. After holding so, the Division Bench vide the judgment and order dated 04.03.2015 allowed the writ petition and set aside the selection and appointment of appellant No. 2 as Secretary of the Club, giving liberty to the State to hold fresh selection within a period of four months. The State respondents were given further liberty to make temporary arrangement for the post of Secretary in the interregnum so that functioning of the Club was not hampered. 6. It is stated that in the meanwhile, Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Assam had raised certain issues regarding registration of the Club under the Assam Cooperative Societies Act, 1949. Accordingly, in the meeting held on 03.01.2014, it was decided to cancel the registration of the Club under Assam Cooperative Societies Act, 1949 and to register the same under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Accordingly, all the committees were dissolved and the office bearers resigned. However, to manage the affairs of the Club, it was resolved to empower appellant No. 2 to act as Honorary Secretary of the Club and Hon'ble Chief Minister as the President of the Club. Following a series of correspondences, the Club was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 on 06.03.2014 and a new Byelaw was framed which provided that the Secretary of the Club would be from the College of Aeronautical Engineering as the said College had taken the entire initiative of reviving the Club. Following a series of correspondences, the Club was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 on 06.03.2014 and a new Byelaw was framed which provided that the Secretary of the Club would be from the College of Aeronautical Engineering as the said College had taken the entire initiative of reviving the Club. It is said that pursuant to such correspondences, the Governor of Assam vide notification dated 05.12.2014 had cancelled the previous two notifications dated 19.05.2007 and dated 07.10.2013, issued by the Sports & Youth Welfare Department, Government of Assam. Notification dated 19.05.2007 pertained to constitution of ad-hoc Governing Body of the Club and notification dated 07.10.2013 related to appointment of appellant No. 2 as Honorary Secretary of the Club. This fact was clarified by the letter dated 20.02.2015 of the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Sports & Youth Welfare Department, addressed to the Director of Sports & Youth Welfare, Assam wherein, it was mentioned that the Club was a registered society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. It was further stated that since the Club was registered under the Societies Registration Act, all the previous Government orders stood revoked. Thereafter, on 13.04.2015, Addl. Registrar of Cooperative Societies (General), Assam informed the Secretary of the Club that registration of the Club under the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949 was already cancelled on 12.02.2010 and liquidation proceeding of the Club was closed as per Section 97 of the said Act vide order dated 06.08.2012. 7. It was contended that in view of the aforesaid developments, the very nature and character of the Club had undergone a complete change. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 27.05.2015 was passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Sports & Youth Welfare Department, the contents of which have already been noticed above. 8. Appellants challenged the legality and correctness of the aforesaid order dated 27.05.2015 before the learned Single Judge primarily on the ground that it was an act of undue interference by the Government into the affairs of a private society and that the Government had no jurisdiction to pass such order. Who would be the Secretary of the Club was an internal matter of the Society (Club) which would be decided as per the Byelaws of the Club. 9. The writ petition was contested by the respondents i.e., respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4. Who would be the Secretary of the Club was an internal matter of the Society (Club) which would be decided as per the Byelaws of the Club. 9. The writ petition was contested by the respondents i.e., respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4. The said respondents in their common affidavit stated that appellant No. 2 is the Secretary of a newly formed Non-Governmental Society by the name of Assam Flying Club, having a similar sounding name as Assam Flying Club Ltd., which is a society registered under the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949 in 1958. Assam Flying Club Ltd. (Cooperative Society) has nothing to do with Assam Flying Club, which is a different entity. Appellant No. 2 has therefore, no authority and control over the affairs of the original Assam Flying Club Ltd. It was asserted that Assam Flying Club Ltd. (Co-operative Society) was in full existence and that Government of Assam has been sanctioning grants-in-aid through the Sports & Youth Welfare Department regularly. It is stated that the meeting held on 03.01.2014 by the members of Assam Flying Club had no relation or bearing over the affairs of the original Assam Flying Club Ltd. (Co-operative Society), as both the organizations are distinctly separate. It was further stated that advice of Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam was not known in respect of cancellation of registration of Assam Flying Club Ltd. Authorised representative of Sports & Youth Welfare Department, Government of Assam had not attended the meeting held on 03.01.2014. Assam Flying Club Ltd. (Co-operative Society) can be dissolved only as per provisions of the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949. Sports & Youth Welfare Department, Government of Assam had no knowledge about registration of Assam Flying Club as a Society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. It is alleged that the whole plot was enacted by appellant No. 2 to grab the public property of Assam Flying Club Ltd. Government had withdrawn the inter-departmental letter dated 20.02.2015 by its letter dated 12.6.2015. Therefore, letter dated 20.2.2015 cannot be treated as approval of the Government of Assam for handing over the Assam Flying Club Ltd. to the appellants. It was clarified by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General), Assam vide his letter dated 27.07.2015 that the Assam Flying Club Ltd. was not de-registered by the office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam. It was clarified by the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies (General), Assam vide his letter dated 27.07.2015 that the Assam Flying Club Ltd. was not de-registered by the office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam. There is no notification for cancellation of registration of the Assam Flying Club Ltd. by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam; therefore, the Assam Flying Club Ltd. is still in existence with regular funding by the Government of Assam through the Directorate of Sports & Youth Welfare, Assam. It is asserted that the impugned notification dated 27.05.2015 was issued incompliance to judgment and order of this Court dated 04.03.2015, passed in WA No. 102/2014. The State respondents reiterated that filing of the related writ petition by the appellants was motivated to make illegal gain and to usurp the public property of Assam Flying Club Ltd. 10. In their affidavit, State respondents also referred to the judgment and order dated 28.07.2015, passed in Review Petition Nos. 72 & 83 of 2015 filed by the appellants for review of the judgment and order dated 04.03.2015, passed in WA No. 102/2014. 11. Appellants filed detailed reply-affidavit to the counter-affidavit filed by the State Government reiterating their contentions made in the writ petition. 12. A counter-affidavit was also filed by respondent No. 5. 13. According to him, Assam Flying Club Ltd. is a State Level Co-operative Society registered under the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949, having registration No. R-1 57/58 of 1958 with the present address at LGBI Airport, Borjhar, Guwahati-15; the area of operation being extended to the whole of Assam. It is stated that Assam Flying Club Ltd. is regularly funded by the State Government Supporting the stand taken by the State respondents, it is contended by respondent No. 5 that appellant No. 2 is the Secretary of a newly formed NGO with a similar sounding name, Assam Flying Club, which is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Assam Flying Club Ltd. and Assam Flying Club are two different entities. Therefore, appellants do not have locus standi in so far affairs of Assam Flying Club Ltd. (Co-operative Society) are concerned. Assam Flying Club is still in existence. Assam Flying Club Ltd. and Assam Flying Club are two different entities. Therefore, appellants do not have locus standi in so far affairs of Assam Flying Club Ltd. (Co-operative Society) are concerned. Assam Flying Club is still in existence. Meeting held on 03.01.2014 was a completely private meeting and had no relation with the general body meeting of Assam Flying Club Ltd. Respondent No. 5 submits that Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies had no jurisdiction to cancel registration of a State Level Co-operative Society, like the Assam Flying Club Ltd. While admitting that Assam Flying Club Ltd. was in a non-functional state for a long time, it is stated that the same was, however, never dissolved nor registration cancelled. Impugned order dated 27.05.2015 was rightly issued. It was also contended that creation of a new society was an attempt by the appellants to usurp the property of the original Assam Flying Club Ltd. Therefore, writ appeal should be dismissed. 14. Appellants filed a detailed reply-affidavit to the counter of respondent No. 5 whereafter respondent No. 5 filed rejoinder. 15. Learned Single Judge by the judgment and order dated 04.04.2017 not only dismissed the writ petition but gave liberty to the State to hold appropriate inquiry into the affairs of Assam Flying Club. 16. Mr. Dey, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants submits that the State Government did not have any jurisdiction to pass the order dated 27.05.2015. Assailing the reasons given by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition, he has contended that learned Single Judge had traversed beyond the scope of the lis by giving liberty to the State to cause an inquiry. He further submits that learned Single Judge had erred in recording a finding that Assam Flying Club Ltd. and Assam Flying Club are two different entities having separate existence. Assam Flying Club Ltd., which was initially registered as a Co-operative Society under the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949 is no longer in existence as its registration has been cancelled by the appropriate authority whereafter, Assam Flying Club has been registered as a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Respondents had unnecessarily tried to create confusion by raising a non-issue. Validity of the impugned order dated 27.05.2015 has to be judged on the material so which existed at that point of time and not on the basis of any event, anterior or posterior. Respondents had unnecessarily tried to create confusion by raising a non-issue. Validity of the impugned order dated 27.05.2015 has to be judged on the material so which existed at that point of time and not on the basis of any event, anterior or posterior. Registration of Assam Flying Club as a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 has not been questioned by anybody and certainly the same cannot be questioned collaterally by the respondents in a proceeding instituted by the appellants assailing the legality and correctness of the impugned order. Arguments advanced on behalf of the respondents are self-defeating because, even if the Club is considered as a Co-operative Society, then in that event also, Government of Assam or Director of Sports & Youth Welfare would be complete strangers to the affairs of a Cooperative Society. Their interference would be impermissible. Impugned order of the learned Single Judge is beyond pleadings. Assam Flying Club, even though registered as a Cooperative Society under the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949, never functioned as a Co-operative Society. There is no record of a single Annual General Meeting since inception of the Club in 1958. No audit was ever conducted into the accounts of the Club. It was in such circumstances that in the meeting held on 3.1.2014 that the Registrar of Co-operative Societies suggested that the Club should reorient itself as a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. He, therefore, submits that judgment of the learned Single Judge should be set aside, so also the impugned order dated 27.05.2015. 17. On the other hand, Mr. D. Saikia, learned Senior Addl. Advocate General, Assam has strongly supported the order passed by the learned Single Judge. After appellant No. 2 was appointed as the Honorary Secretary of the Club, respondent No. 5 lodged complaint that appellant No. 2 had carried out illegal activities to the detriment of the Club. Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Sports & Youth Welfare Department had requested Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam to nullify the liquidation/de-registration of the Club and to restore its registration. Addl. Registrar of Co-operative Societies in his inquiry report stated that de-registration and liquidation of the Club was not proper and the same was done at the instance of some vested interest. Mr. Addl. Registrar of Co-operative Societies in his inquiry report stated that de-registration and liquidation of the Club was not proper and the same was done at the instance of some vested interest. Mr. Saikia has launched a multipronged attack on appellant No. 2 and submits that appellant No. 2 is trying to take over the Club which the Government and well wishers of the Club are determined to resist. He submits that cancellation of registration of the Club is totally illegal and non est in the eye of law. Since the Club is still in existence, there cannot be registration of another Club having the same name and the same kind of activities but, under a different statute. He, therefore, submits that the writ appeal is devoid of any merit and should be dismissed. Justifying the decision of the learned Single Judge giving liberty to the State to conduct inquiry into the affairs of the Club, Mr. Saikia has placed reliance on the following decisions: - (i) Duggi Veera Venkata Gopala Satyanarayana v. Sakala Veera Raghavaiah, (1987) 1 SCC 254 ; (ii) Union of India v. Kishan K Sharma, (2004) 2 SCC 173 ; and (iii) Sriram Industrial Enterprises Ltd. v. Mahak Singh, (2007) 4 SCC 94 ; 18. Mr. P.K. Roy Choudhury, learned counsel representing respondent No. 5 has adopted the submissions of Mr. Saikia and additionally submits that the order of the learned Single Judge giving liberty to the State to hold inquiry is fully justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. 19. Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have been considered. Also perused the materials on record; 20. A careful perusal of the impugned judgment and order of the learned Single Judge would go to show that learned Single Judge recorded that Assam Flying Club, being a Primary Level Co-operative Society, was closed as being defunct on 10.02.2010. However, learned Single Judge further observed that since appellant No. 2 was appointed as Honorary Secretary on the basis of a public advertisement, it would pre-suppose that one Co-operative Society existed at the time when the appellant No. 2 was appointed as Honorary Secretary. However, learned Single Judge further observed that since appellant No. 2 was appointed as Honorary Secretary on the basis of a public advertisement, it would pre-suppose that one Co-operative Society existed at the time when the appellant No. 2 was appointed as Honorary Secretary. Referring to the impugned order, learned Single Judge observed that when the Government appointed Sri Ranuj Barkotaky, a Government Officer to take over charge of the Assam Flying Club Ltd. by use of the suffix "Ltd.", Government was referring to the State Level Co-operative Society established in the year 1957-58. On that premise, learned Single Judge held that the Government had appointed an officer to look after the Assam Flying Club Ltd. which is a distinct and different organization from Assam Flying Club of the appellants registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Therefore, learned Single Judge held that Government had not appointed anyone as in-charge of Assam Flying Club for the appellants to be aggrieved of. On that basis, learned Single Judge held that Assam Flying Club and Assam Flying Club Ltd. are two different entities. Since the impugned order did not cause prejudice to the appellants, therefore, the writ petition was held to be without any merit and was accordingly dismissed. 21. We are afraid we can concur with the conclusions and decisions of the learned Single Judge for more than one reason. But before we do that, it will be useful to briefly survey the relevant legal provisions of the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949, under which the Assam Flying Club or Assam Flying Club Ltd. was registered. However, before we embark upon this exercise, we find that learned Single Judge himself had noted that a Primary Level Co-operative Society by the name of Assam Flying Club was closed being defunct on 10.02.2010. 22. It is the admitted position that Assam Flying Club was initially registered in the year 1958 under the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949. Let us, therefore, examine what are the essential features or characteristics of a Co-operative Society registered under the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949 (1949 Act). 23. 22. It is the admitted position that Assam Flying Club was initially registered in the year 1958 under the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949. Let us, therefore, examine what are the essential features or characteristics of a Co-operative Society registered under the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949 (1949 Act). 23. As per the preamble, the 1949 Act was enacted to facilitate formation and working of Co-operative Societies for the purpose of thrift, self-help, mutual aid and creating quality of credit worthiness amongst agriculturists, artisans and other persons with common economic needs so as to bring about a higher standard of living, better business, better methods of production, equitable distribution and exchange and to consolidate and amend the law relating to Co-operative Societies in the State of Assam. Section 4 provided for registration of Societies. Section 6 dealt with conditions of registration. Ordinarily, no society was to be registered under the said Act which did not consist of atleast ten eligible persons. 24. As per Section 10, an application for registration was required to be signed by atleast ten eligible persons. Besides, the application for registration was required to be accompanied by copies of the proposed bye-laws of the Society. If the Registrar was satisfied, he would register the society and its byelaws with or without modifications under Section 11. 25. Section 31 dealt with General Assembly. General Assembly of a registered Cooperative Society consisted of those who were eligible to vote. The supreme authority of a registered society was vested in the General Assembly. 26. As per Section 32, a general meeting to be termed as Annual General Meeting of the General Assembly of a registered society was required to be held atleast once in every Cooperative year. A Managing Body of the Society was to be constituted which was vested with the power of management of the Society. 27. According to Section 35, State Government, on an application of a registered society and on such conditions as might be determined, could depute Government officials to the service of the society for the purpose of managing its affairs. 28. 27. According to Section 35, State Government, on an application of a registered society and on such conditions as might be determined, could depute Government officials to the service of the society for the purpose of managing its affairs. 28. Section 40 provided for registered address of every registered society and as per Section 41, every registered society was required to allow inspection free of charge by any member of the society in the office of the society of the following : - (a) Copy of the 1949 Act; (b) Copy of the Rules framed thereunder; (c) Copy of the byelaws of the Society; (d) Copy of all rules framed under the byelaws; (e) Annual balance sheet authenticated by the Auditor Office; and (f) Such other books, forms, registers or other documents as may be prescribed by the Registrar. 29. Under Section 55, accounts of every registered society had to be audited atleast once in every year and the Registrar was responsible for audit. While Section 60 provided for enquiry by Registrar into the constitution, working and financial condition of a registered society; Section 61 dealt with inspection of society by the Registrar. The 1949 Act provided for cancellation of registration (Section 65) and winding up of a Cooperative Society (Section 66). 30. A conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions of the 1949 Act reveals that a Cooperative Society must possess the following :- (a) It must have a registered office. (b) Members, minimum being 10; (c) Byelaws; (d) A general assembly comprising of members eligible to vote; (e) A managing body; (f) Holding of Annual General Meeting annually; (g) Accounts must be audited every year. This list is illustrative and not exhaustive. 31. In the absence of the above, can it be said that a Co-operative Society, once registered under the 1949 Act, continues its existence? If for years together, there is no list of members or register of members and no Annual General Meetings are held, can such a society be said to be in existence? It is on record that three Senior Inspectors/Auditors of Cooperative Societies had submitted a report to the Addl. Registrar of Cooperative Societies (General), Assam on 29.10.2014 wherein, they had stated that Assam Flying Club was registered under the 1949 Act vide Registration No. R-1/57-58 of 1958. It is on record that three Senior Inspectors/Auditors of Cooperative Societies had submitted a report to the Addl. Registrar of Cooperative Societies (General), Assam on 29.10.2014 wherein, they had stated that Assam Flying Club was registered under the 1949 Act vide Registration No. R-1/57-58 of 1958. As per their report, barring a short period from 01.04.1983 to 31.03.1986 when the accounts of the Assam Flying Club were audited by the Auditor of Audit (Local Fund), there was no audit of its accounts. No balance sheet of any year of the Club was found. Therefore, it is in these circumstances that Sub-Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Assam had informed the Addl. Registrar of Cooperative Societies (General), Assam on 03.07.2014 that the registration of the Assam Flying Club was already cancelled on 12.02.2010, which fact was taken note of by the learned Single Judge who, however, made the observation that it could relate to a Primary Level Cooperative Society. 32. There is no material on record to show existence of a Primary Level Co-operative Society called Assam Flying Club and a State Level Co-operative Society, also called Assam Flying Club. Moreover, on going through the order dated 12.02.2010 which was brought on record by respondent No. 5 as part of his rejoinder to the affidavit-in-reply of the appellants, we find that Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kamrup had conducted an inspection of the Club whereafter it was observed that deregistration of the Club had become absolutely necessary and therefore in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 65 of the 1949 Act, registration of the Club was cancelled. 33. Reverting back to the power of Registrar, we find that under Section 8 of the 1949 Act, question of continuance of a Society under the 1949 Act was required to be decided by the Registrar. Under Section 65(2) of the 1949 Act, the Registrar after an enquiry held under Section 60 or after an inspection made under Section 61, could cancel the registration of a society which, amongst others, had ceased working or in his opinion, ought to be dissolved. Order of cancellation of registration dated 12.02.2010 was passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kamrup exercising powers under Section 65 of the 1949 Act, which power is to be exercised by the Registrar. Order dated 12.02.2010 does not disclose that such power was delegated to the Deputy Registrar by the Registrar. 34. Order of cancellation of registration dated 12.02.2010 was passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kamrup exercising powers under Section 65 of the 1949 Act, which power is to be exercised by the Registrar. Order dated 12.02.2010 does not disclose that such power was delegated to the Deputy Registrar by the Registrar. 34. We find that Assam Flying Club was in a dormant state till the advertisement was issued by the Government of Assam in the Sports & Youth Welfare Department dated 03.09.2013 for appointment of Honorary Secretary under Clause 26(e) of the Byelaws of the Club. Therefore, from 1958 till 2013, barring a short period of time, it appears that the requirements of the 1949 Act were not complied with. It is in this context that cancellation of registration vide order dated 12.02.2010 assumes significance. 35. Appointment of appellant No. 2 as Honorary Secretary following the advertisement dated 03.09.2013 was put to challenge by respondent No. 5 before this Court in WP (C) 6809/2013 which was, however, dismissed by the learned Single Judge. Against such dismissal, he preferred WA No. 102/14. Division Bench considered the scope and ambit of Clause 26(e) of the Byelaws and also noted that the selection was carried out by the Government. Though appointment of appellant No. 2 as Honorary Secretary would not fall within the domain of public employment stricto senso, nonetheless, it was a recruitment made by the Government under Clause 26(e) of the Byelaws. It was noted that the applications of the 29 applicants were considered on the basis of paper sorting, following which appellant No. 2 was selected and appointed. Holding that such selection cannot be said to be a valid selection in the eye of law, selection and appointment of appellant No. 2 was set aside vide the judgement and order dated 04.03.2015. However, liberty was granted to the State to hold fresh selection within four months and during this interregnum, State was given the liberty to make temporary arrangement so that functioning of Assam Flying Club was not hampered. 36. At this stage, we may point out that in the meanwhile, a significant development had taken place, which unfortunately, was not brought to the notice of the Court. 36. At this stage, we may point out that in the meanwhile, a significant development had taken place, which unfortunately, was not brought to the notice of the Court. Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Sports & Youth Welfare Department had issued an notification dated 05.12.2014 cancelling constitution of ad-hoc Governing Body of Assam Flying Club on 19.05.2007 and appointment of appellant No. 2 as Honorary Secretary of Assam Flying Club on 07.10.2013. If this fact had been brought to the notice of the Court, perhaps the final directions of the Court might have been different. 37. Be that as it may, it is now seen that appellant No. 2, along with others, had registered Assam Flying Club under the Societies Registration Act, 1860; possibly following cancellation of registration of the Co-operative Society on 12.02.2010. This registration was done on 06.03.2014. Such registration has not been questioned by anybody till this point of time; at least it has not been brought to the notice of the Court. 38. If the registration of Assam Flying Club was cancelled on 12.02.2010 and the subsequent appointment of appellant No. 2 as Honorary Secretary was cancelled on 05.12.2014, in that case, there would be no legal basis for issuance of the impugned order dated 27.05.2015. Even otherwise, we have noticed that under Section 35 of the 1949 Act, the State Government may, only on an application of a registered society, depute government officials to the service of a Co-operative Society and for the purpose of managing its affairs. Therefore, on this count also the impugned order dated 27.05.2015 cannot be sustained. 39. At this stage, it may be mentioned that the 1949 Act was repealed and in its place the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 2007 has been enacted. Section 48 of the Assam Cooperative Societies Act, 2007 (2007 Act) is pari materia to Section 35 of the 1949 Act. Under both the provisions suo moto interference by the Government may not be permissible. Therefore, issuance of the impugned order dated 27.05.2015 is clearly beyond jurisdiction and, thus legally unsustainable. Section 48 of the Assam Cooperative Societies Act, 2007 (2007 Act) is pari materia to Section 35 of the 1949 Act. Under both the provisions suo moto interference by the Government may not be permissible. Therefore, issuance of the impugned order dated 27.05.2015 is clearly beyond jurisdiction and, thus legally unsustainable. However, having said that we feel that a formal and conclusive pronouncement of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam regarding existence or cessation of working of Assam Flying Club, having regard to the order of cancellation of registration passed on 10.02.2012, is called for to remove all doubts and confusions once and for all. Section 8 of the 1949 Act and Section 8 of the 2007 Act contain identical provisions empowering the Registrar to decide all disputes regarding registration or continuance of a Co-operative Society. 40. In so far the further direction of the learned Single Judge granting liberty to the State to conduct enquiry into the affairs of the Assam Flying Club is concerned, we of the considered opinion that such direction was really not called for, that too, on the writ petition filed by the appellants on the limited grievance as to the legality and correctness of the order dated 27.05.2015. It was not the prayer of the writ petitioners, and if the respondents wanted such a relief, they ought to have approached the Court as the petitioners. It is a settled proposition that a party which approaches the Court seeking some relief should not be prejudiced by orders of the Court. If the relief claimed is found to be untenable or the writ petition is found to be devoid of merit, the same should be dismissed. Unless there are compelling reasons or the circumstances so warrant, orders adverse to the writ petitioners beyond dismissal of the case should ordinarily be eschewed. Resultantly, we allow this appeal and the writ petition. Impugned order dated 27.05.2015 is set aside. Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Assam may pass necessary order in the light of discussions made above within a period of 6 weeks from today. No Costs.