ORDER : Dinesh Mehta, J. 1. By way of present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged action of the respondents (Municipal Corporation North and South), who have refused to grant certificate of registration of marriage to them, despite having solemnized their marriage as per Vedic Rites and Rituals in ‘Merti Gate Arya Samaj’ on the ground that said branch of Arya Samaj is not enlisted in the list supplied by Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Rajasthan. 2. Mr. Purohit, learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the petitioners have solemnized their marriage as per the provisions of the Arya Marriage Validation Act, 1937 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1937’) by performing Hindu rituals (Arya Vedic Rites). He argued that irrespective of the fact that a marriage has been solemnized in some temple or in some Arya Samaj which is enlisted in the Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Rajasthan or not, the petitioners’ statutory right of getting their marriage registered, cannot be denied. 3. Mr. Chug, learned counsel appearing for the respondent – Municipal Corporation submitted that the Arya Samaj, where the petitioners got their marriage solemnized, namely, Merti Gate Arya Samaj is not mentioned in the list which has been provided to the Municipal Corporation and therefore, the Municipal Corporation has rightly refused to register their marriage. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. On perusal of section 2 of the Act of 1937, it transpires that for a valid marriage no such condition is specified that a particular Arya Samaj should be registered or enlisted in another society. Section 2 of the Act of 1937 is reproduced hereinbelow:- “ Marriage between Arya Samajists not t o be invalid.— Notwithstanding any provision of Hindu Law, usage or custom to the contrary no marriage contracted whether before or after the commencement of this Act between two persons being at the time of the marriage Arya Samajists shall be invalid or shall be deemed over to have been invalid by reason only of the fact that the parties at any time belonged to different castes or different sub-castes of Hindus or that either or both of the parties at any time before the marriage belonged to a religion other than Hinduism.” 6. The registration of the marriage is governed by the Rajasthan Compulsory Registration of Marriages Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 2009’) and none of the provisions contained therein requires an Arya Samaj to be registered or recognized by another society. 7. This Court does not find any logic or rationale in the approach of the respondent – Municipal Corporation which has refused to register petitioners’ marriage, simply on account of non-mentioning of the branch of Arya Samaj in question in the list issued by Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Rajasthan. 8. The reason given by respondent – Municipal Corporation is per-se arbitrary and unsustainable. The registering authority cannot refuse to register a marriage based on such criteria, when the Act of 2009 does not envisage any such condition, particularly in light of sections 3 and 9 of the Act of 2009. Unless the very factum of marriage is doubtful or the marriage is otherwise void or illegal as per the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 or other applicable law, the Registrar cannot refuse to register a marriage. 9. The present writ petition is, therefore, allowed. 10. The Registrar of the Jurisdictional Municipal Corporation is directed to register petitioners’ marriage in accordance with law, if their marriage is otherwise legal. Needful be done within a period of 15 days from today. 11. The stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly.