Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 636 (JHR)

Amitava Chatterjee v. State of Jharkhand

2024-06-27

ANANDA SEN

body2024
ORDER : Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner in this writ application is a member of a Society, registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the election of the society was not conducted properly and there was violation and large scale irregularities in conducting the elections. There is further allegation that the Secretary is involved in malpractices and unfairly uses the property of the premises of the society for his own business. There is a school run by the society, but the school is illegally run without NOC and affiliation of Class X. Further grievance is that the playground of the School has been destroyed by constructing building and members are not allowed to speak or put forth their opinion and the President, General Secretary and the Secretary (Finance) of the Society is working like a dictator. Alleging irregularity in functioning of the President, Secretary and the Treasurer of the Society, the petitioner filed an application and approached the Inspector General of Registration under the Societies Registration Act of 1860 and prayed to take appropriate steps. 4. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the Inspector General of Registration is not taking any steps and has not taken any action on the said representation, which prompted the petitioner to approach this Court by filing this writ application with a prayer to direct the Inspector General of Registration to act upon the representation of the petitioner and take appropriate remedial steps. 5. Mr. Atanu Banerjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that in terms of Rule 12 of the Bihar Society Registration Rules, 1965, which is applicable in the State of Jharkhand also, the Inspector General of Registration may, in his discretion, make inquiry or investigation in respect of the matter, as in his opinion, it is necessary for proper working of the society and administration of the Act. He submits that where the activities of the Society which are subversive to the object of the Society, the Registrar can definitely intervene. Thus, the Registrar should have taken and decided the matter on the representation of the petitioner. 6. After hearing the parties, I find that the petitioner has grievance about conducting elections and the manner in which the Secretary and the President of the Society is functioning. Thus, the Registrar should have taken and decided the matter on the representation of the petitioner. 6. After hearing the parties, I find that the petitioner has grievance about conducting elections and the manner in which the Secretary and the President of the Society is functioning. The Societies Registration Act, 1860 has been framed for improving the legal condition of Societies established for the promotion of Literature, Science or Fine Arts or for the diffusion of useful knowledge, for diffusion of political education and for charitable purpose. Once the Society is formed and a memorandum of association is prepared with the name and objects of the Society, the same needs to be registered. On issuance of certified copy, the registration has to be done by the Inspector General of Registration, who will certify under his hand that Society is registered under this Act. Section 23 of the Societies Registration Act, as inserted by the Bihar Act 2 of 1960, provides for cancellation of registration in certain cases. Be it noted that the Inspector General of Registration has the power to cancel the registration, but, for which, he has to make an enquiry. In this application, it is not the case, where the petitioner is seeking to cancel the registration of the Society. He is trying to raise a dispute, which is there between him and other members and the President, Secretary and the Treasurer. It is apparent that there is a dispute in respect of elections also. The dispute, if arises amongst two persons or two bodies of the Society, or even if the validity of the office bearers is questioned by the petitioner, the same cannot be adjudicated or decided by the Inspector General of Registration. Inspector General of Registration is not an adjudicatory authority, who can decide the disputes between the members inter se or between the members and the office bearers. There is no provision in the Societies Registration Act of 1860, which makes the Inspector General, Registration, an adjudicatory authority. Since the Inspector General, Registration is not the adjudicatory authority and it is not the case of the petitioner that he is seeking to cancel the registration of the society, in my view Rule 12 of the Bihar Societies Registration Rules of 1965 is not applicable in the instant case. Since the Inspector General, Registration is not the adjudicatory authority and it is not the case of the petitioner that he is seeking to cancel the registration of the society, in my view Rule 12 of the Bihar Societies Registration Rules of 1965 is not applicable in the instant case. If the petitioner has got any grievance in respect of elections, it is open to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court. 7. With the aforesaid observation, this writ application is dismissed.