Mandi BahaudIn Khalsa Education Society Vs. State of M.P. and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

- - it is conceived in the best interest of the institute as a whole......if it has so directed then it cannot be held to be something which is adverse to the interest of the society.what becomes adverse is, the action then taken by the authority after thesubmission of the inquiry report and if it goes against the society. 5. i, therefore, do not find any case to set aside the impugned order. i accordingly dismiss the writ and uphold the order impugned. however, it is further directed to the registrar to complete the inquiry preferably within a period of three months strictly within the frame work of section 32 ibid and depending upon the outcome of an inquiry initiate remedial action keeping in view the provisions of adhiniyam against the society and/or members if the eventuality so demands. needless to observe, all actions if required to be taken by the registrar on the basis of the outcome of an inquiry shall be done after following due procedure prescribed under the law as also following principle of natural justice, so that aggrieved will get enough opportunity to defend himself.

Judgment:

ORDER

A.M. Sapre, J.

1. The decision rendered in this writ shall govern the disposal of W.P. No. 700 of 2002.

2. The challenge in substance in this writ relates to an appellate order, dated 27-4-2002, passed by State (Annexure P-11) under Section 40 of the M.P. Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973. By impugned order, the State has directed to hold an inquiry by the Registrar as contemplated under Section 32 of the Adhiniyam in relation to the affairs of petitioner's society.

3. It is not in dispute that disputes have arises in relation to membership of persons of the said Society and also its manner of functioning as also its manner of running the activities of the Society. It is in this context, when the matter went to Appellate Court in respect of some disputes touching the affairs of the society, the State as an appellate authority directed the Registrar to hold an inquiry into the affairs of the society as contemplated under Section 32 ibid.

3. I find no case to interfere in such direction given by the Appellate Court to Registrar. Indeed, holding of an inquiry into the affairs, manners of functioning of any society at a time when it is involved in the inter se disputes of the members, is just, proper and legal. It is conceived in the best interest of the Institute as a whole. In the enquiry, the Registrar is able to know the real state of affairs, if there are some irregularity committed then how far they can be rectified and depending upon its outcome, the eventual direction to be given to the Society to rectify so that the Society starts functioning in accordance with the object for which it is formed and also in accordance with the requirement of the Adhiniyam.

4. It can not be disputed that the Appellate Court does possesssuch power to direct holding of an inquiry and if it has so directed then it cannot be held to be something which is adverse to the interest of the society.What becomes adverse is, the action then taken by the authority after thesubmission of the inquiry report and if it goes against the society.

5. I, therefore, do not find any case to set aside the impugned order. I accordingly dismiss the writ and uphold the order impugned. However, it is further directed to the Registrar to complete the inquiry preferably within a period of three months strictly within the frame work of Section 32 ibid and depending upon the outcome of an inquiry initiate remedial action keeping in view the provisions of Adhiniyam against the Society and/or members if the eventuality so demands. Needless to observe, all actions if required to be taken by the Registrar on the basis of the outcome of an inquiry shall be done after following due procedure prescribed under the law as also following principle of natural justice, so that aggrieved will get enough opportunity to defend himself.