High Court Karnataka High Court

A Society Registered Under The … vs The District Registrar Of … on 5 December, 2008

Karnataka High Court
A Society Registered Under The … vs The District Registrar Of … on 5 December, 2008
Author: N.K.Patil
9% THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAEQGALORE W.P.No.l 3128 OF 2008
I

!/'{5«.\

in THE men COURT or KARNATAKA AT 

vamp was THE 5'" mm or nIcc£n3n:y~~wf{I§3 ;  A'  _

ms HCNBLE MR. .;usw:.E"k ts:;:»<,Pao;nL   _j% %    '

BETWEEN:

BOWRiNGiN$T!TUTE   
ASOCIETYREGISTEREED.  " 
unmen THE KARNATAK_A'$OCiETiE$ " _
REGISTRATKJN ACT,      "
AND HAVING as Awasss--Afr 929.19, 

ST' MARKS ROAD, BANGF:: sscaanas
BANGALORE unazws msIm:;T..osF:cE op THE
aeessrma os=Vso-313153. m:;.1
ALIASKAR R'AOD,_ 2 
eA§4sALo:::5_52. _ 
 _ _    "' .. _____ _. RE&°ONDENT
"  (By'3MT, Ah; saguaagaamaa, AGA )
' '  v2:é_:1ff'.::»'éT:T:o~ £$ FILED UNDER ARHCLES 226 AND 22? os=
me CCf*é$TiTUT30N <3; mm PRAYING to QUASH ms IMPUGNED

 £)T,...25.11,2008 maven seamen 25 GF THE KARNATAKA
 4' gosnvmsas Rsazsmmon ACT 1960 Pnonucan as ANNEXURE-8 to
" 1'HEVwr:w'PET:'r:oN.

 was wnrr PETITION coaam on 5042 mzsummnv HEARING,

  ' V » . _  "  my, "me own? MADE 'me FOLLOWNG:

+N '-f3H+€ +H£-FH E3f}HR"!' 6}? 'K"A'R'!<3'A'$'A'l€'A'A'3'?TA'N€?fiT.€fi{Fi 'JJ.1'.?if£3'.?3"¥"2R ('}"F'§i)i)5%

 _ 



IN THE IHGII COURT OF KARRATAKANAT IEANQALORE W.P.No.§ 5328 OF 2033

L

. 

Petitianer in this petition is a soc&et;,:%jLi’eg;g:e:ed %%%

under fine Karnataka Societies F£ie”gi:<;traA_ti':;n_;

Petitioner has sought for quashin»;'g.'tAi:i'e.=:V_

dated 25*" Nave-mber 2OD8"'fif1der Seétion%% the
Kamataka Sacieties Qoduced
as Annexure- 8 'me =

2. The institute in the
instant writ registered under
the Act, 1960 and was

establishefi. a literary and scientific
” ‘ did

ins1itu§é.’V fit is 3″ jéalflssmimion and was formaiiy

mder me Societies Registration Act, 1860 and

s§ib$é§quéh{§.§g the Mysore Societies Registration

% 1″9eo.%ALL The main objects of the petitioner —- institute

« pefmit the literary, sciemific and scsciai improvement

égfi ciasses of the community, of both sexes, by

cf 3 reading room, iibrary, concerts and other

“‘–“”‘”””””-“**—–«–u

+H ‘-I?-Hé mew crtxrn-:1’tz2= 1<""AR?~3'A'¥'A'IC€ "AT 1:m~2′.’NE»ii Fsiézic (fr: éiiak

antertainment and such other indoor and outdoor games

and arousemena and offers faoifities for A’

inteiiootual and more! improvement. it is

petitioner that, the institute has tfieeo V

the parameter of the bye Saws of

compliance with the reievanf
Societies Registration soid”ln§:titute is
one of the premier for its
excellence a;*nd’:j;§tije. has got fuii
transtrarenci}; case, the District
Registrzfj’ his power under

Section ofoothev..Societie-3 Registration Act,

‘!96O»,4; ‘on, too of one complaint given by few

of the Institute regarding five

insfitute, without application of mind,

H ‘V has to appoint the Enquiry Officer, contrary to

of the Act, as referred above. Thereforo,

LN ‘IRE idififl C{.}L%R’f’ til’ KA£~?.NA’li#d€A AT 1:?.AN’GAL.(.)R,i:£ W’P..$’*$o..1 $128 (-1? iiiflii

petitioner herein felt necessitated to present the

writ petition seeking appropriate reliefs, as state§}”ei3p§éi’VVi’ _

3. I have heard learned counsel _e,—-.pefe,fi’ng fer” «. ”

petitiener and learned Additional

appearing fer respondent. V

4. The principal eubmieeijep»veen_yeeeeeipyfllveerned
ceuneel appearing ii the order
impugned fine Enquiry
Officer is iliiiiifliri provieicme of
Section A’ S’pcie”i:i% Registrefion Act,
1960 read” fhe Karneteka Societies

Registfe:tiopi’FiuVl’ee,iV eel l=urther, he submitted that, no

being heard has been prcvicied

preeeeding to pass the impugned

order_,’:i’ire$:ilt:i:i}tgii; in clear violation of the principles of

. .. Q ‘ ~ . pp-eturel jisrsfice.

V’ After careful perusal of the grounds urged by

’11’ Vpefiéioner and the circle: impugned, appointing the

UM-“”_””~”””””””*-wu

4+: ‘H-I-i~I men é3f}fi$€’1’ {*}l~’*i<'»*-l:"R'a*<li=l'<'E'KK";'£"fi'E°"F%'s€'f*é(?fiT.{}i€E s.vv.";e¢'~.'.'li*s»"2§i< 6;? "fziiiaii

E3 1"} IE HIGH COURT 0}? }”:§~i;,’e3.r<<5w msww' §,;fi~i4'i'¥%"'$

" 7§";,¥sA?'=:,:§$».-z_§«i*,;f5Vi~i._'_1t~'r3\r<4'\ ca;-'aE,'a§:7a:£ i:§Q,'${?,f§a§3\i§£714.-

; fmf' ….".':"»';.*.,'£':_<=";{:-/,"Y'£S.§§; 30$: xmézfi. ?.:2_%':~:c§
'.5133',-"s§'é'§'i§:cdJ:i;a£ .g.,%c3m% gm f7?c'iu~

'U

LN 'JJ'£1:€ Hifiiri £3L}L§1<'.1f' (J1-" JC–AR1'\§~A'-i–A8.A' ' ~A'«i'4=§1*¥«?¥2§–i:M«{–)§t:i*' W"~§*3'€f?1 'H38 {-}F~33§lE}¥¢

IN THE IIIGH COURT GP KARNATAKA AT EANGALORE W.P.No.i 5128 OF 2968
6

6. The respondent, on being prima facie

and aonvinced that, me allegations made are H37′.

nature and in order to find out the vepacity ta’ 9?’ ‘A V’

the said grave aliegaticms, has, in

fit to conduct an enquiry.

Section 25 of five Act, .i1ésvv–ap;;ointed
the Enquiry Officer to made in
the cempiaint am a period of
one monm H: impugned that,
the ai!egV:aiti’tm'<V:;A: 1t<"::4 firima facie appear to
be serioviis "if: misappropriation of

funds and fl1éiref_:§r€.:,. that, the genuineness of the

"a33eg$£:i;£§n:-9»: wayid V known oniy after conducting

herefore, by exercising his power as

V envi$aged,__'vun<uief Section 25 cf the Karnataka Sociefies

' Act, 1960, on fire basis; cf fiwe informatian

4'_ §{¥&5j'V7.vVi3ttae*}~;;/aiaint given by some of the members of the

_§::1s*.i*ii::1te, has passed the imp ned order, appointim the

"I'}'f"E ?'£*fIf§H ("I{'}f§!€'§'(' 31~'1{"fi€"P€'?'~f"£X'l'i'{'?(' A 'A1'1'¥"Ifi'h3('i"A¥.f )'R'¥€ W.V."hih'M1f§1'2K ()'¥*'§§)f3R

IN 1113:, 1:131: mug': as §<LAR1'~ZATAK.A§AT um:-ALc:RE w_p.Ne.; 5:23 or 2099,

Enquiry Gffic-er under Secfion 25 (2) of the Act to

inta the aiiegaticns made agaimt the .

institute. 2 do net find any errer cr_Ji.iiegam},.. .1;§§A’;i%;’:}%3rs§ty

as such cammitted by re$;:s:31c}ent[_’_’ :f

impugned eféar nor 3 find a£13{“‘gooflA”‘g§jeu:}«E§%
made out by Petiti§2~¥’1§er ‘(‘c.>”* ‘:u:.’1″fi<~fer"'?'e:»s_rfg'=e iri' 'vibe; order
impugned. .. '. V . _ ._ V. .

7. The?” the iearmd
counsei for ;i5:’C§}i§$”§’i{¢f3;n”‘{3f Section 25 has
not beezji éiimfiiiigd Vétflavznd ta any reason for
the simpfe 25 (1) of the Act is amply

ciear that tha4″4F2a ;gis;{?ar ¥1a §. every right ta hoid an enquiry

én.h§£~*’_; fifih sfiwojtien as aisa an compiafiwts received fmm

does not disabie the Registrar from

V V _exerdis£ng:fi1é”sue meta pcwers of directing an enquiry

.-hffecéuse he has been appmached by ceniy few

of the Society.

m 11%: mm €:nrn~:’r {T¥~’K”A3{?\s’}fi’;§3eT:€ “A”i’¥€§N(f§T.(z1€F:\&:i3>1?~s£aZi?31?$< {J'r="'2§}f)é . ‘ i

9. Further, it is the efieged
eliegatione numbering to be quite
serious in nature in order
ta find out ettwemise of the said
aiiegatiegietttregxereirgé. of funds of that
magnitude * ifiae: his power and

appointed _flwe’4″Ersquiry Therefore, interference

by in the impugned order pesfi by

T V V “warranted.

‘i9. reliance pieced by learned eeunsei for

‘ etparagraphs 8 and 8 of the judgment reported

Kar.2715 in the case at Kedava Same} Vs.

Registrar, is not appiéeebte to the facts and

A

its .lJ:£k=,J:£3:’Lre!=i (.’.£}£»}$€«i €}H(w%-}€~NaA+:M&A-A~! +tAN{.”rA+.t’}’fft~, w’.1>1xm:15??:¢ €}F2f)(}X

IN THE HIGH CCIURT OF KARNATAKA AT EANGALQRE W.P.}’J<:a.1 5128 OF 2008
16

circumstances of the case on hand and is

assistance ire him in 315% pefition, in View

gettied iaw iaid down by the Divisi;m..B__efnc§1″df ‘

in the case of AS. Kupparaju V3: Cégflefafi

Raju Kshatriya Welfare Assé¢i§t§¢n mrcstgezes
in 1990 (2) K.L.J. P.4C?3..’where%r;a». i+s%»F2:e:d’tmt,k%’*j when

thg Registrar écfs sun mtétkjtsr’ Mi’ §1is._.__:g§v2;ff:.v”

materiai avaiiableé :c3theri.Atha§:i;V.a ctirfi .Ia§rfnj;’b members of

mag’crity.v;Q?é§cV:;:g’3ie;’§:;’t§_j;j§r:5§”vVto_§}iéfcise his power under
Sectien do so orsiy after due

applic.f;t§.mj e1″‘4§1?~i.f3§i5’e:Snd.’Vdi§c%osure of material upon which

fiwafliwust be expiicit in the order he is

requihzd fd”‘:n_ak.§.””‘Such an order mnnot be capricious er

_wEthc:i:!c paiépér examination and investigation of the

Span which he proposes to at fat such action

arbitrary” (underlined by me). Further, the

‘ Bench ca’ this Court else}, in me case of Bangalore

TF4 ‘zm: mm £:c;rn{‘ro2«’ 1<'xsm~;rA'i*A"i(A 'AE'i'?fA":~z€;"AEz".(:3»:""§: <.a:'.v:?ee.: i Ts"i"ia'¢ f :1' éiiric

1-.2 mg 1210:: cow: 0}? KARRATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.i 5128 OF 2098
11

Grain Merchants Association Vs. The Districi’ Registrar

for Societies and Another in W.P.Na_38942{1’9.:$?»5.V

disposed of on 5″‘ January 2001 reported in _I;E’_’Fa”” _

Kar. 766 has heid that, ” the i::fq;m§ga_gn%kfa%:e:kin;gL[the f

basis for exercise of sun-rnotu p6wer”1″m[av’T?»mnj’s: éf:*i€:nj”*i.j

am! sourge; inciudinn §__msingi;é_v:’231¢m’E”§;§rV:_of
The exercise of such pqwer by…ffi8–.|3%e;§gisit:éi’–v€:a!3§Iot be
contrc-Hed by the fact thét made by ie$s

than H3″ of ‘iif of members

petitioning%’tc« {}f1s:; or more, as already
discussefi the &aegsm,»;s% and obliged to initiate

an enquiry. ¥’-%eV_ E1as=né;. dfifian but to act and direct the

tfiéV”huVmber is tags, the Registrar can

hoiding the enquiry, if he feeis that

the én{;uir__y’%ég’ warranted. (underiining by me). in this

‘ fiasé, the Registrar has formed a definite opinion

“th«;é aiieged aiiegations against petitioner are prima

–. fac:i’e, appear to be serious in nature and fiwerefare,

“””‘”””‘””””””””°'”-°’—M——…

+94 was-a €3tIh’R’1’€IF1<'A1{Tsrfii'I'A1(A's5iT'?fAN{{AT,i')'¥{Fi w'.v.":ssés'."I 3152 (iv ééafxi:

IN THE 1IIGIiC.0?.J3ZT OI? KARNATAKA AT BANGALORII W.P.}-39.15128 OF 2008

}2

proceeded to appcint the Enquiry Officer to go inte-jihev

aiiegations made against the petitioner and

report. Further, as observed by the Fu1!i"i3e§i¢f!§"'ii:1Vt!1e.i, = A

aforesaid judgment that, the

motion' is synonymous to
the dictionary means. ,'s'9h "Own
motion" obviously We elf mind and
formation of matter how
and fmm whet The exercise
of metion cannot and
ought narrow sense and in a

sense " salutary purpose of the

The on a consideration of such

whether it is a fit case, warranting

: initieticin qt in the overaii interests of the Society.

flue" eeee on hand, the respondent, upon receipt of

A cum information, having been fuiiy satisfied

':'_thet,§ the eiiegatione made against me petitioner appear

»h~'–""""'"""'**-*—v–..

ee 1::-w: -FHHH e:e;r:se*:’ tna1″.’rs3éi_i Tsiiic €33-‘I2i3é)i<

1}: 11133 man coum' 01'? KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.l 5128 01? 2008

to be prima facie seriaus in nature, thought it

order an enquiry to find out the truthfulness _

alleged allegatians. Therefore, petitioner. " ~ V.

any objection for the same and i*}'.._at133?,7tHa é}!é§z'a%ie.ns.;_

are found ta be untrue, Vpetitiorier 2 may'v:1'é§:'en.VV éae

exonerated.

11. Having regav2’éi*:i*’i.3′– ‘circumstances

of the case, tijgeé is liable to

be dismi%e<i% ggnacordingiy, it is
dismissed MMMM " j

Judge

9Mv*&f?_[%_ %- – %%%%%

-3-?’*«§’4’++!r-2-I-G-l{–*§!-il’:.’ ” ‘ 3. 1 ._ . ‘- — __..
£3!-H-H (‘}i~1€’A1€’E%2’-‘(‘¥ A’Kfi A’? ‘ffz%¥T’~§C1AT.(‘)’RT=I W.V.Nn.7 31334 {W 21308