JUDGMENT
V.K. Bali, J.
1. Styling themselves as President and Secretary of Haryana State Yoga Association, Shri Dharam Vir, IAS and Shri M.L. Vairagi, have challenged order, Annexure P-5 dated December, 1997, vide which order, Annexure P-3, dated August 9, 1996 has been withdrawn, Order, Annexure P-3, so withdrawn vide Annexure P-5, had granted recognition to Haryana Yoga Association headed by Shri Dharam Vir, IAS. While passing order, Annexure P-3 dated August 9, 1995. Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Haryana, Sports and Youth Welfare Department has mentioned that two parallel Yoga Associations have been working for some time in the State of Haryana. The matter was under consideration as to which Yoga Association should be given recognition by the Government of Haryana. The whole facts were verified and after getting the facts from Indian Olympic Association and Haryana Olympic Association, it had been decided by the Government that the Haryana Yoga Association with Shri Dharam Vir, IAS, as its President and Shri M.L. Vairagi, Assistant Director (Yoga) Sports Department, as its Secretary should be Ven recognition as this Yoga Association has been recognised by the Haryana Olympic Association. Consequent upon that, the facilities being given to the different recognised Sports Association by the Government of Haryana, it was mentioned, should be given to this Association. As mentioned above, it is this order which was withdrawn vide impugned order, Annexure P-5 dated December 10, 1997.
2. The primary and in fact the only contention raised by Mr. Mehta, learned counsel representing the petitioners is that having recognised the Haryana State Yoga Association as headed by its President and Secretary, namely, Shri Dharm Vir, IAS and M.L. Vairagi, order, Annexure P-5 could not possibly be passed till such time at least the petitioners were heard in the matter. Order, Annexure P-5 was passed violating the principle of audi-alteram-partem and on that account, it has necessarily to be set aside, further contends the learned counsel.
3. In the context of the only contention of learned counsel for the petitioners noted, above, even though there is no need to give facts, giving rise to the present petition, but still we think that it shall be necessary to give brief resume of the same. It is the case of the petitioners, projected in the petition, that petitioner Association was formed in the year 1984 and Shri B.S. Ojha, IAS was elected as its first president. Petitioner-Association was recognised by the Apex-Body-Haryana Olympic Association and affiliated to Indian Yoga Federation of India. On November 14, 1987 Shri B.S. Ojha voluntarily resigned and Shri K.C. Sharma, IAS, was elected as its President. On October 16, 1991 a meeting of the general body of the petitioner Association was held and as agenda item for no confidence motion was passed against Shri K.C. Sharma, IAS and Shri Ashok Kumar Aggarwal, as its President and General Secretary respectively. In the said meeting, Shri Dharam Vir, IAS was elected as the President and Shri M.L. Vairagi was its Hony. Secretary unanimously. It is further pleaded that the Association run by Shri Dharam Vir, as its President, was recognised by the Apex body and it organised State level functions at various intervals. A copy of the minutes of the meeting vide which Shri K.C. Sharma and Ashok Kumar Aggarwal are said to have been removed as President and General Secretary of the Association has been annexed with the petition as Annexure P-1. It is then pleaded that a meeting of the Executive Committee was held on August 22, 1993 wherein Shri Dharam Vir, IAS and Shri M.L. Vairagi were again unanimously elected as President and General secretary respectively. However, Shri K.C. Sharma, after being removed from the post of President of Association, formed a parallel association under the same name and style and continued to function as its President at his own, without any recognition from any Apex Body. On August 9, 1996, the Haryana Government, after considering the entire matter, in consultation with the Haryana Olympic Association, decided to give recognition to the petitioner Association with Shri Dlwam Vir, IAS as its President and Shri M.L. Vairagi, as its Secretary, vide Annexure P-3. It is further the case of the petitioners that despite order Annexure P-3, Government made a reference to the Registrar, Firms and Societies on December 10, 1997 requesting then to take a decision with regard to the dispute between the two Yoga Associations. One headed by Shri K.C. Sharma and the other by Shri Dharam Vir, IAS. However, on the same day, i.e. December 10, 1997, without waiting for the decision of the Registrar of Firms and Societies, the State Government withdrew order dated August 9, 1996 Annexure P-3.
4. It may be mentioned here that when the petition was filed, a note was appended wherein it was mentioned that Civil Writ Petition No. 16024 of 1997 had been filed by Shri K.C. Sharma, claiming himself to be the President of the Haryana State Yoga Association in which order dated August 9, 1996. Annexure P-3 had been challenged. It was further mentioned that during the pendency of the said writ petition, which was fixed for motion hearing on January 8, 1998, the State Government had withdrawn order, Annexure P-3.
5. Pursuant to notice issued by this Court respondents 1 and 2 have filed reply. Before the matter could be heard, an application under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. was filed wherein prayer was made to array Haryana State Yoga Association (Regd.) through its President Shri K.C. Sharma, IAS, as party-respondent in the writ petition. After seeking reply of the said application from the petitioners and the State, vide a detailed order dated August 17, 1998, the same was allowed. The added respondent, i.e. respondent No. 3 has also filed its reply.
6. While opposing the cause of the petitioners, respondents 1 and 2, i.e. the State of Haryana and Director, Sports Department, Haryana, have pleaded in the preliminary objections that thus petition is not maintainable in the present form as it was clarified by Government of India through its letter dated January 31, 1995. Annexure P-1 and letter dated February 13, 1996. Annexure R/2 that Yoga is a part and parcel of physical Education. Moreover, it is not a game, thus, no fundamental right of the petitioner Association had been violated. It is further the case of respondents 1 and 2 that both the rival associations were intimated about the impugned order, Annexure P-5 and they were also advised to approach the Registrar, Firms and Societies, Haryana for adjudication of their dispute. The matter was also referred by the Director, Sports to the Registrar, Firms and Societies, Haryana, for adjudication as to which of the two rival associations should be treated as the real Haryana State Yoga Association. It was also decided not to give any grant-in-aid, scholarship, Graduation Certificates and cash awards till the dispute between the two rival associations was decided. The Registrar, Firms and Societies vide his letter dated December 23, 1997 had informed the Department that in such matters the parties had either to settle the matter amicably or get their disputes decided through a competent court of law.. It is further the case of respondents No. 1 and 2 that the Association headed by Shri K.C. Sharma, IAS challenged the office order dated August 9, 1996 in this Court by way of Civil Writ Petition No. 16024 of 1997 in which Shri Dharam Vir, IAS was also impleaded as respondent No. 3, who filed written statement on behalf of his association wherein he raised no objection to the impugned order before this Court. Respondents withdrew office order Annexure P-3 on December 10, 1997 and, therefore, the said writ petition (No. 16024 of 1997) became infructuous and accordingly the same was disposed of on February 19, 1998 by this Court. It is then pleaded that the present petition is bad for non-joining of necessary party as rival association headed by Shri K.C. Sharma, IAS has not been joined as party in this writ petition.
7. The matter, as would be apparent from the written statement filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2, has been contested by the State but the more serious contest comes from respondent No. 3. It has been pleaded by the said respondent that the petitioners Shri Dharam Vir, IAS and Shri M.L. Vairagi have not approached this Court with clean hands and they are guiity of suppressing material facts. They have attempted to mislead this Courts by relying upon the fake and bogus documents claiming to be the resolution dated October 16, 1997 in which it is alleged as if any No Confidence Motion was carried out against the validly elected President of the Haryana State Yoga Association headed by Shri K.C. Sharma. The fact of the matter is that the said resolution dated October 16, 1991 is not signed by any valid voter of the Haryana State Yoga Association except one, Mr. M.S. Deswal. Resultantly, Shri K.C. Sharma, continued to be the President of the said Association and he was re-elected to the said office unanimously on February 27, 1994. The election of the office bearers of the said Association again took place on May 16, 1998 at Chandigarh in which Shri K.C. Sharma, IAS was again elected as its President in a unanimous manner for another term of four years. It is further pleaded that these facts, have, however, been concealed by the petitioners from this Court and as such, the writ petition observes to be dismissed on this score alone. It is then pleaded that the petitioners have sought to impugn order dated December 10. 1997 passed by the State Government on the false pretext that the same has been allegedly been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. It is the case of respondent No. 3 that the persons like the petitioners who were beneficiaries of an illegal order procured by them from the then Minister Incharge. Sports Department, Haryana, dated August 9, 1996 which was passed without any material on record and without affording an opportunity of hearing to the genuine Yoga Association i.e. respondent No. 3, cannot be permitted to make complaint of non-observance of principles of natural justice. It is then pleaded that petitioner Shri Dharam Vir, IAS, was posted as Commissioner and Secretary, Agriculture Department, Government of Haryana and Shri Karan Singh Dalai was the then Minister Incharge of the Department of Agriculture as also the Sports Department. Shri Dharam Vir, IAS, was also Additional Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister, Haryana at that time. Taking undue advantage of his direct and close proximity with the Minister-incharge, Shri Dharam Vir, IAS, got issued an order dated August 9, 1996 from the Minister Incharge whereby the fake and bogus Association headed by him was recognised by the Sports Department, Haryana, after a period of five years of its formation. As a result thereof, the genuine Yoga Association, i.e., respondent No. 3 was de-recognised without giving an opportunity of hearing even though it was validly recognised Yoga Association since the year 1984. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, respondent No. 3 approached this Court by way of CWP No. 16024 of 1997 in which Shri Dharam Vir, IAS, was also impleaded as respondent No. 3, who also filed written statement contesting the said writ petition. The State Government, however, found itself defenceless in respect of the impugned order dated August 9, 1996 and therefore, on reconsideration of the whole matter, the Government of Haryana issued order dated December 10, 1997 vide which previous order dated August 9, 1996, Annexure P-3 was withdrawn. Resultantly, recognition which was validly enjoyed by respondent No. 3 since the year 1984 was legitimately restored. In so far as reliance placed by the petitioners upon the alleged recognition given by the Haryana Olympic Association to their association is concerned, it is pleaded that when the entire matter was brought to the notice of the Haryana Olympic Association, the said Association reconsidered the matter regarding recognition of genuine Yoga Body in the State of Haryana and the Executive Committee of Haryana Olympic Association met on January 11, 1998 at Chandigarh wherein it decided to recognise the Yoga Association headed by Shri K.C. Sharma, IAS, i.e., respondent No. 3 as the only genuine body of Yoga in the State of Haryana. The aforesaid decision of the Executive Committee was ratified by the General Body of the Haryana Olympic Association in its meeting held on the same day. Copies of the decisions, referred to above, have been annexed as Annexures R3/1 and R3/2. It is then pleaded that the petitioners deliberately did not implead resoondent Nc.3 as party-respondent in the writ petition so that this Court may be deprived of the full assistance on facts and background of the case.
8. With a view to elucidate the facts and, in particular, with regard to the alleged No Confidence Motion against Shri K.C. Sharma, it has been pleaded that right to cast vote in the meeting of the general body of the Haryana Yoga Association is with the following persons:-
“a) Presidents of the District Yoga Associations;
b) Members of the Executive Committee of the Haryana State Yoga Association;
c) Vice Chancellor or his nominees on behalf of the autonomous educational institutions, i.e., Universities of the State.”
9. It is then pleaded that resolution dated October 10, 1997 has been signed none who might fall in either of the aforesaid three categories and as such they never enjoyed the right to cast vote in the meeting of the general Body of the Haryana State Yoga Association nor were they authorised to call such a meeting. All of them except Mr. M.S. Deswal were strangers to the Haryana Yoga Association and they impersonated themselves to be the valid members or authorised representatives of the valid voters. By way of example, it is mentioned that the Deputy Commissioner, Jind, could exercise his right to vote in the meeting of the General Body of the State Yoga Association as President.
However, resolution dated October 16, 1991 depicts that one Zora Singh, a lineman in Haryana State Electricity Board, assumed himself to be the President of the District Yoga Association and, thus, replaced the Deputy Commissioner, Jind, so as to become a signatory to the above stated fake and bogus document. It is further the case of respondent No. 3 that since Shri K.C. Sharma and Ashok Kumar Aggarwal were never removed as President and General secretary respectively of the Yoga Association, question of electing Shri Dharam Vir and M.L. Vairagi in their place did not arise. There are other averments also made in the written statement with an endeavor to show that Shri K.C. Sharma and Ashok Kumar Aggarwal continued to be the President and General Secretary of the Association and the resolution pleaded by the petitioners vide which Shri K.C. Sharma and Ashok Kumar Aggarwal were removed and instead Dharam Vir, IAS and Mr. M.L. Vairagi were elected as President and General Secretary, is bogus and made up affair, but we do not wish to proceed any further to discuss the said averments as we do not think that it is a stage or a forum to go into all these assertions as also in view of the fact that in ultimate analysis we are going to take a view that the assertions and counter-assertions made in the writ petition can only be subject matter of decision by Civil Court where evidence can be recorded.
10. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties as also accompanying documents and have also heard learned counsel for the parties. Before we may proceed to comment upon the only contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners, noted above, we would certainly like to mention that the petitioner should have impleaded respondent No. 3 as party-respondent in this case. The petitioners themselves plead that vide impugned order Annexure P-5 recognition granted to their Association was withdrawn. It is further the case of the petitioner that recognition granted to the petitioner Association headed by Shri Dharam Vir, IAS, vide order, Annexure P-3. It is further mentioned in the petition itself that a writ petition challenging order, Annexure P-3 had since already been filed and that during the pendency of the said writ petition, the Government had withdrawn order, Annexure P-3 vide order Annexure P-5. Concededly, the petitioners were party-respondent in the writ petition, referred to above. The position being admitted and conceded, as referred to above, respondent No. 3 was a necessary party and it is for that precise reason that when application under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. was disposed of, the counsel for the petitioners had to candidly admit that if order Annexure P-5 was set aside, it would directly affect respondent No. 3.
11. Coming now to the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that order, Annexure P-5 has been passed without hearing the petitioners, we are of the view that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the said contention has no merit whatsoever. Order, Annexure P-5 was passed and thereafter produced in the Court in CWP No. 16024 of 1997, reference whereof has been made above wherein petitioners were party-respondent. As mentioned above, respondent No. 3 had challenged order, Annexure P-3, on the same very ground, i.e., that respondents were not heard when the said order was passed, even though by the said order a validly constituted Yoga Association headed by Shri K.C. Sharma, IAS, stood de-recognised and recognition was given to the association headed by Shri Dharam Vir, IAS. The Government, it appears, under the stress that order, Annexure P-3, is bound to be set aside, withdrew the same and that too, as referred to above, after producing the order in Court, in the petition filed by respondent No. 3 wherein petitioners were party-respondents. In the facts and circumstances, as have been detailed above order Annexure P-3 had necessarily to be set aside. Having obtained a favourable order without hearing the party which was adversely affected by such order, petitioners can not complain of breach of principles of natural justice, i.e. that they were not heard in the matter when order, Annexed P-5 was passed. It may be mentioned at this stage that petitioners admit that Haryana Yoga Association was headed by Shri K.C. Sharma, IAS as its President and Shri Ashok Kumar Aggarwal, as its Secretary, although they further go on to say that they were removed vide resolution dated October 16, 1991. Respondent No. 3 has brought material on record to show that the said resolution is a concocted one and with a view to strengthen the said contention, it has been mentioned that none of the members, but for one are signatories to the said resolution. The matter has further been elaborated by way of examples, referred to above but we are refraining ourselves to go into the said issue as that might prejudice either of the parties in the contest that may be gone into by them either before the Civil Court or any other forum that may be available to them under the law. The Government, in our view, was absolutely justified in withdrawing order, Annexure P-3 by which status-quo ante was restored and relegating the parties to an appropriate forum to vindicate their rights. It may be mentioned here that two orders, Annexures P-4 and P-5 were passed on the same day i.e., December 10, 1997. Vide order, Annexure P-4, it was mentioned that in view of the claims made by these persons, namely, petitioners and respondent No. 3, Registrar, Firms and Societies should adjudicate as to which faction should be declared as the real Haryana State Yoga Association.
12. In view of the observations made above, we do not find any merit in this petition and dismiss the same with liberty to the petitioners to vindicate their stand in an appropriate forum. Parties are, however, left to bear their own costs.