Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 506 (UTT)

Sarvan Singh v. Deputy Registrar

2024-07-24

MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI

body2024
JUDGMENT : Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Petitioner no. 2 claims to be the Vice President of a registered society known as ‘Gurunanak Siksha Samiti’, which manages three educational institutions in District Udham Singh Nagar, while petitioner no. 1 claims to be the member of General Body of the said society. Petitioners have challenged the order dated 12.7.2024, passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Udham Singh Nagar, whereby he has upheld the decision of the Managing Committee of the said society, taken in the meeting held on 13.5.2022, inducting respondent no. 2 to 31 as member of the society. 2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that the order passed by the Deputy Registrar is unsustainable relevant provisions of the bylaws of the society were not considered. He further submits that the Committee of Management held a meeting on 6.5.2022, in which it was decided that next meeting for considering the applications for becoming member shall be held on 13.5.2022; thus any application for membership submitted after 6.5.2022 could not have been considered by the Committee of Management in the next meeting held on 13.5.2022. However, such applications were not only considered but the persons making such application were also inducted as Member. He submits that this issue was highlighted by petitioners before the Deputy Registrar, however, the Deputy Registrar has completely overlooked the said aspect, therefore, impugned order is unsustainable. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners further contended that as per the bylaws, every person desirous of becoming member of the society has to tender membership fee through bank draft, which has to be enclosed with the application. He submits that the bank draft has to be prepared in the name of the person, who is making application, however, in the present case, bank draft submitted by some of the applicants were not issued in their name, which indicates that such applicants had not gone to the bank for preparing the bank draft and someone else prepared the bank drafts on their behalf. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that some of the private respondents do not profess Sikh religion, which is necessary, as per the bylaws, to become member of the society. However, Deputy Registrar has not considered this aspect of the matter and upheld their membership. 5. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that some of the private respondents do not profess Sikh religion, which is necessary, as per the bylaws, to become member of the society. However, Deputy Registrar has not considered this aspect of the matter and upheld their membership. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel for the respondents submit that there is no restriction on the power of Committee of Management to entertain the application for membership, submitted after the meeting in which the agenda for considering fresh applications for membership is fixed. They further submit that there is no minimum statutory period prescribed in the bylaws between date of submission of application and the date when the decision to induct new members has to be taken by the Committee of Management. 6. Learned Counsel for the respondents further contend that there is no provision in the bylaws which requires that the applicant has to go to the bank for getting the bank draft prepared and the bank draft prepared through a servant/agent shall be discarded. It is further contended that bank draft is an instrument that carries a guarantee of funds from the bank/financial institution and unlike a cheque, bank draft has a guarantee that it will not bounce due to insufficiency of funds. Thus they submit that purpose of bank draft is to collect fee from the applicants, which is achieved once the amount is credited into the account of society. 7. As regards the third issue that some private respondents do not profess Sikh religion, learned Counsel for the respondents submit that there is no pleading to this effect in the writ petition, therefore, learned Counsel for the petitioners cannot raise an issue which is not pleaded. They, however, submit that this aspect has been dealt with by the Deputy Registrar in his order dated 12.7.2024. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that after referring to Section 4(9) of the Gurudwara Act, 1925, Deputy Registrar has recorded a finding that all the members inducted as member are Sikh in view of the declaration given by them as per the Gurudwara Act, 1925. 8. This Court finds substance in the submissions made by learned Counsel for the respondents. The induction of members is regulated by the bylaws of the society. 8. This Court finds substance in the submissions made by learned Counsel for the respondents. The induction of members is regulated by the bylaws of the society. The relevant provision of bylaws is quoted below: “5(g) Procedure for membership:- That an application for membership shall be given to the President/Manager of the Managing committee of the society alongwith a bank draft of the required fee in the name of society, passport size 3 photographs, certificate of the date of birth and certificate of required educational qualification. That a meeting of the managing committee of the society shall be called for the purpose and the decision taken by the managing committee on the application for membership shall be final and it shall not be challenged in any Court of law. That the membership of the society cannot be claimed as matter of right. Qualifications of Members:- 1. The Person opting for ordinary membership or life membership shall be at least a graduate. 2. The office bearer of the managing committee of society shall not be less than a graduate. 3. He/she shall be a Sikh Professing faith in 10 Gurus and Shri Guru Granth Sahib. 4. He/she shall be above 40 years in age.” 9. Thus the bylaws do not prescribe any such condition that application for membership has to be submitted before circulation of agenda for consideration of such applications. Bylaws nowhere provide any minimum period between date of making application and the date when decision is to be taken on such application. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has not been able to show any provision in the bylaws which may be construed as prohibition against entertaining applications for membership after the meeting in which agenda is decided, that applications for membership shall be considered in the next meeting. In such view of the matter, the decision to induct new members, who applied after 6.5.2022, taken by the Committee of Management in its next meeting held on 13.5.2022 cannot be faulted. 10. The second contention raised on behalf of petitioners, that some bank drafts were not prepared by the applicants themselves but were got prepared through someone else, therefore such applications were liable to be rejected, is also without any substance. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners could not show any such provision in the bylaws. 10. The second contention raised on behalf of petitioners, that some bank drafts were not prepared by the applicants themselves but were got prepared through someone else, therefore such applications were liable to be rejected, is also without any substance. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners could not show any such provision in the bylaws. In the absence of any express provision in the bylaws that an applicant himself is required to go to the bank to get the bank draft prepared, the challenge to impugned order, on this count, is also without any basis. 11. As regards the third contention raised by petitioners, Deputy Registrar has considered the relevant statutory provision and also the declaration given by the persons, who were seeking membership, and thus held that they all are Sikh. Moreover, whether a person inducted as member is Sikh or not is a question of fact, which has been decided by the statutory authority i.e. Deputy Registrar. Furthermore, in the absence of any averment challenging the status of persons inducted as member, the submission made by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners regarding religion cannot be entertained. 12. For the reasons recorded above, this Court does not find any scope of interference with the impugned order. Consequently, writ petition fails and is dismissed.