Mercy Memorial Education Society ... vs Deputy Registrar Firm Society And ...
2011 Latest Caselaw 6421 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 38
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 70903 of 2011
 

 
Petitioner :- Mercy Memorial Education Society And Another
 
Respondent :- Deputy Registrar Firm Society And Chit And Others
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Atul Dayal
 
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajes Kumar,J.

The petitioner is a Society, which is running an Educational Institution. For the years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 the petitioners submitted audit reports and also produced the necessary documents before the Deputy Registrar Firm Society and Chits, Kanpur Nagar.

It appears that some complaint has been made on the basis of which an inquiry was made and nothing wrong was found in the inquiry. The said report is dated 5.6.2009. It appears that Sri P.K. Shukla has made a complaint and raised the dispute relating to the management of the Society which has been referred under Section 25 (1) of the Societies Registration Act to the Prescribed Authority. The Prescribed Authority decided the matter in favour of the petitioners and the writ petition against the said and the special appeal have also been dismissed. It appears that a further complaint has been filed by Sri P.K. Shukla before the Commissioner, Kanpur Mandal, Kanpur on which report has been sought from the Deputy Commissioner. In the report, the Deputy Commissioner examined the matter afresh and has observed that there is no substance in the complaint of Sri P.K. Shukla. Now by the impugned notice dated 23.9.2011 the Deputy Registrar has asked the petitioner to produce the cashbook, ledgers, bills/vouchers, membership register, proceeding register, bank bass book, salary register, P.F. statements, etc. for the years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11 on 29.9.2011 and further by letter dated 2.11.2011 the date has been fixed on 16.11.2011 to produce all the documents.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have sought adjournment, but no order has been passed by the Deputy Registrar. The contention of the petitioners is that the notice is arbitrary and malafide inasmuch as the entire documents relating to the aforesaid periods have already been examined and no discrepancy has been found. Therefore, again on the complaint of Sri P.K. Shukla asking the aforesaid documents for the examination is wholly unjustified.

I find substance in the argument of learned counsel for the petitioners which requires consideration.

Learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 4. Issue notice to respondent nos. 2 and 3. All the respondents may file counter affidavit within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

List thereafter.

Till the next date of listing, the proceeding in pursuance of the notice dated 23.9.2011 issued by the Deputy Registrar, Annexure-13 to the writ petition, shall remain stayed.

Order Date :- 9.12.2011

OP