Committee of Management, Shree Vimal Nath Digambar Jain Teerth Kshetra Committee & Anr. vs Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kayamganj, Farrukhabad & Ors.

Dilip Gupta, J.—The petitioners have sought the quashing of the order dated 7th December, 2009 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Kanpur Region, Kanpur on the complaint filed by Dev Rishi Jain as the President of the Committee of Management of Shree Vimal Nath Digambar Jain Teerth Kshtra Committee by which he has set aside the earlier orders dated 6th June, 2009 and 29th November, 2007.

It transpires from the records of the writ petition that the Committee of Management made certain amendments in the ByeLaws of the Society. These amendments shall be referred to as Amendment nos.2 and 3. Amendment no.2 was approved by the Deputy Registrar by the order dated 29th November, 2007 while Amendment no.3 was approved by the Deputy Registrar on 6th June, 2009. Subsequently Dev Rishi Jain, respondent no.3 filed a complaint stating therein that in so far as Amendment no.2 is concerned, the same is against the judgment and order dated 21st May, 2009 passed by the Court in Writ Petition No.25912 of 2009 and so far as Amendment no.3 is concerned that was obtained by fraud and misrepresentation. The Deputy Registrar has by the impugned order dated 7th December, 2009 set aside the aforesaid approval granted on 29th November, 2007 and 6th June, 2009.

Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners raised number of submissions against the impugned order including the submission that the said order was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

Learned Standing Counsel has put in appearance on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2 while Sri Raj Kumar Jain assisted by Sri Rahul Jain has put in appearance on behalf of Dev Rishi Jain, respondent no.3. They have stated that in the facts and circumstances of the case, it may not be necessary to file a counter affidavit and the petition may be disposed of at this stage.

A perusal of the impugned order does not show that any opportunity had been granted to the petitioners before passing the impugned order.

Learned Standing Counsel and Sri Raj Kumar Jain, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no.3 have also very fairly stated that opportunity had not been granted to the petitioners before passing the impugned order.

The impugned order records a finding that the petitioners had got the Amendment No.3 approved by playing fraud and Amendment No.2 is against the judgment and order dated 21st May, 2009 passed in Writ Petition No.25912 of 2009.

In such circumstances, it was necessary for the Deputy Registrar to give opportunity to the petitioners before passing any order on the complaint filed by respondent no.3 Dev Rishi Jain.

The impugned order dated 7th December, 2009, therefore, cannot be sustained. It is, accordingly, set aside. This order, however, will not preclude the Deputy Registrar from passing a fresh order in accordance with law after hearing the parties concerned.

The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.