U.P. Development of Electro Homoeopathic System of Medicine, U.P. and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....void. the presence of either of the two elements is sufficient to declare the transfer void under the act. the high court was not justified in reading the word ‘or’ after the word ‘benami’ as ‘and’. a bare reading of section 4(4) of the act makes it clear that in either of the eventualities — defeating any of the provisions of the act or being benami — the transfer is liable to be declared void. the facts of this case clearly show that the impugned sale was made with the clear object of defeating the provisions of the act. the sale deed having been made after january 1, 1971 it came within the mischief of sections 4(1) and 4(4) of the act. the high court in disposing of the writ petition was not justified in reversing the finding of the board of revenue that the holder made the impugned sale to defeat the provisions of the act.order1. the petitioner-society was registered under section 3(a) (as applicable to the state of u.p.) of the societies registration act, 1860. the certificate of registration granted to the society expired in october, 1983. the petitioner applied for the renewal of the certificate of registration. since no action was taken on the application the petitioner approached this court by way of this writ petition under article 32 of the constitution of india. it is not disputed by the learned counsel for the parties that the matter regarding renewal of the certificate of registration is still pending consideration before the registrar of societies, state of u.p.2. we have heard learned counsel for the parties. although various questions regarding the eligibility of the petitioner-society to run the educational institutions have been raised in these proceedings but it is not necessary for us to go into the same. we are of the view that the registrar of the societies was under a statutory obligation to decide the application filed by the society for renewal of the registration certificate. we direct the respondent-registrar firms, societies and chits, uttar pradesh, lucknow to decide the.....

Judgment:

ORDER

1. The petitioner-society was registered under Section 3(A) (as applicable to the State of U.P.) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The Certificate of Registration granted to the Society expired in October, 1983. The petitioner applied for the renewal of the Certificate of Registration. Since no action was taken on the application the petitioner approached this Court by way of this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. It is not disputed by the learned Counsel for the parties that the matter regarding renewal of the Certificate of Registration is still pending consideration before the Registrar of Societies, State of U.P.

2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Although various questions regarding the eligibility of the petitioner-society to run the educational institutions have been raised in these proceedings but it is not necessary for us to go into the same. We are of the view that the Registrar of the Societies was under a statutory obligation to decide the application filed by the Society for renewal of the registration certificate. We direct the respondent-Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow to decide the application of the petitioners within three months from today after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner-Society through its representative shall appear before the Registrar on December 16, 1992. The Registrar shall pass a speaking order dealing with all the points raised by the parties. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Copy of this order be sent to the Registrar, Societies, State of U.P. Writ Petition (C) No. 11837/85

3. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.