High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Lord Raghunath Temple Charitable … vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 12 February, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lord Raghunath Temple Charitable … vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 12 February, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
               HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

                                C.W.P. No. 12109 of 2008.
                          Date of Decision: 12th February, 2009.
Lord Raghunath Temple Charitable and Hindu Religious Public Trust
[Regd].                        ....Petitioner
                        through
                        None

             Versus

State of Haryana & Ors.               Respondents

through
Mr. R.D.Sharma, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL)

The petitioner society seeks a direction to allow it to run a

Mobile Dispensary in Gurgaon.

As per its case, the petitioner is a Charitable Society

registered with the District Registrar of Firms and Societies, Gurgaon

since 28.10.2003. The Society has arranged funds to purchase a

Mobile Dispensary in order to provide medical services to the people

irrespective of any caste, race, sex or religion. On its part, the

Government of India through its Ministry of Social Justice and

Empowerment has introduced a Scheme in June, 2006 for providing

grant-in-aid to voluntary and other organizations for carrying out

Charitable activities. The eligibility conditions prescribed by the

Government of India for claiming grant-in-aid under the Scheme are

as under:-

“[a] Registered under the Societies Registration Act,1860
[XXI of 1860] or any relevant Act of the State/Union
Territory; or

[b] A public trust registered under the law for the time
being in force; or

[c] A charitable company licensed under Section 25 of
the Companies Act, 1956; or

[d] Indian Red Cross Society or its branches; and or

[e] Any other public body or institution having a legal
status of its own;

[f] The voluntary organization should have been
registered for, at least two years, at the time of
applying for grant under the Scheme. This can,
however, be waived by the Secretary, Ministry of
Social Justice and Empowerment, for reasons to be
recorded in writing, in exceptional cases.

[g] Number of Scheduled Caste beneficiaries is not
less than 60% in cases of voluntary organizations.

[h] Any other organization or training institution of
repute, which may be approved by the Secretary,
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment”.

Notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner Society fulfills the

conditions reproduced above, the State of Haryana is not according

its permission on the ground that the petitioner Society has failed to

hold its election during last three years.

Having heard learned State Counsel and on perusal of

the Scheme launched by the Government of India, I am of the

considered view that the objection raised by the State Government is

totally irrational and alien to the Scheme. The only requirement is

that the voluntary organization should be registered for two years at

the time of application. The petitioner was registered on 28.10.2003

and by now it is more than five years old. In this view of the matter,

the reason assigned by the State of Haryana and its authorities for

refusing the necessary permission to the petitioner to run the Mobile
Dispensary is per-se illegal and can not sustain.

The writ petition is accordingly allowed and respondents

No. 2 to 4 are directed to re-consider the petitioner’s case for

according necessary approval/permission in the light of the

observations made here-in-above. Let the needful be done within a

period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is

received.

Disposed of.


February 12, 2009.                       ( SURYA KANT )
dinesh                                       JUDGE