w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n


S.A. Shaik Dawood v/s District Registrar-Societies, Express Estate Royapettah, Chennai & Others

    Writ Petition No. 26560 of 2022 & W.M.P. No. 25620 of 2022
    Decided On, 30 September 2022
    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras
    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR
    For the Petitioner: T. Sellapandian, N. Kuppusamy, Advocates. For the Respondents: R1, K. Tippu Sulthan, Government Advocate.


Judgment Text
(Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the 3rd respondent from convening the annual general body meeting scheduled to be held on 28.09.2022 and the consequent election to the 3rd respondent society to be held on 06.10.2022 without following the Rule 27(4) of the Memorandum of Rules of the Muslim Educational Association of Southern India.)

1. The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the 3rd respondent from convening the annual general body meeting scheduled to be held on 28.09.2022 and the consequent election to the 3rd respondent society to be held on 06.10.2022 without following the Rule 27(4) of the Memorandum of Rules of the Muslim Educational Association of Southern India.

2. In respect of the second respondent Society in conducting an Executive Committee Meeting as well as the Annual General Body Meeting on 28.09.2022, there was an objection from the petitioner, as according to him the said meetings were proposed with several procedural violations and therefore, in order to restrain the third respondent from conducting such Annual General Body Meeting and the consequential election, which is slated to be conducted on 06.10.2022, the petitioner has given a representation to the first respondent District Registrar on 15.09.2022. Pursuant to the same, on 15.09.2022 the first respondent had issued a notice to the fourth respondent and in this regard thereafter since nothing was forthcoming, the petitioner has moved the present writ petition with the aforesaid prayer.

3. Heard Mr.T.Sellapandian for Mr.N.Kuppusamy learned counsel for the petitioner who would submit that, though such a larger prayer has been sought for in this writ petition, now the petitioner wants to confine his prayer only to the extent that if the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 15.09.2022 to the first respondent is directed to be decided on merits and in accordance with law at the earliest ie., before 06.10.2022, the date on which the election is scheduled to be conducted, the petitioner would be satisfied.

4. Heard Mr.K.Tippu Sulthan, learned Government Advocate on behalf of the first respondent. In view of the orders that is going to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the respondents 2 to 4 is hereby dispensed with.

5. Learned Government Advocate submits that, pursuant to the notice dated 15.09.2022, after receipt of the reply from the fourth respondent, the first respondent has come to know that they conducted the Executive Committee Meeting on 06.09.2022 and proposed to conduct the Annual General Body Meeting on 28.09.2022 ie., day before yesterday and probably they could have conducted the Annual General Body Meeting. Therefore, in this regard according to the first respondent the procedure as contemplated under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act as well as the Rules made thereunder having been followed only this kind of procedure has been adopted by the fourth respondent and therefore, at this juncture there is no scope for interference.

6. However, the said submission made by the learned Government Advocate for the first respondent is stoutly denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner and he would submit that, he has got a record to show that there has been violation of various provisions of the Act as well as the Rules made thereunder and without considering the same in proper perspective, the fourth respondent cannot unilaterally take a decision to conduct the Annual General Body Meeting. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that let the first respondent / District Registrar be directed to decide the representation given by the petitioner dated 15.09.2022 after hearing both the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent, final orders shall be passed thereon before 06.10.2022 so that the petitioner would know where he would stand and accordingly he would work out his remedy.

7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the materials placed on record.

8. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent, this Court feels that this writ petition can be disposed of by passing the following orders.

* That there shall be a direction to the first respondent / District Registrar to pass final orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 15.09.2022 after hearing both the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent.

* While deciding the same, the first respondent must verify whether violation

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
s as complained by the petitioner on the part of the fourth respondent and his men have been really available and if so or if not the same shall be examined, and after giving his reasons either as to the violations or non-violations on the part of the parties concerned, the orders on the representation of the petitioner shall be passed by the first respondent on or before 06.10.2022. 9. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
O R