HYDERABAD KARNATAKA EDUCATION SOCIETY Vs. REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Both these appeals under Article 136 of the Constitution of India seek to challenge a common judgment and order dated 25-3-1997 rendered by a Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Writ Appeals Nos. 7486 and 7487 of 1996, whereby two Writ Petitions Nos. 3630 and 33463 of 1994 filed in the High Court by respondents Nos. 2 to 10 herein came to be allowed against the common appellant-Hyderabad Karnataka Education Society (for short 'appellant-society'). By the impugned judgment it was also held by the High Court that Rule 7 as well as the substituted Rule 7(A) framed by the appellant-society ran counter to Section 2(b) of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). These Rules were, therefore, struck down. An Additional Reason for striking down the Rules, according to the High Court, was the fact that the Rules were harsh in their operation. In order to appreciate the grievance of the appellant-society regarding the impugned Rules, it is necessary to note a few relevant introductory facts. BACKGROUND FACTS:

(3.) The appellant-society was earlier registered on 3-4-1958 under the provisions of the Hyderabad Societies Registration Act, 1958. At that time it was functioning in the territory of Ex-Nizam State at Gulbarga. After the said territory became part of the Karnataka State, the Act became operative and governed the functioning of the appellant-society. On 6th of June, 1961, the Hyderabad Societies Registration Act was repealed by the present Act of 1960 which came into force with effect from 6-6-1961. The appellant-society therefore, became "deemed to be registered" under the present Act. Respondents Nos. 2 to 10-original writ petitioners in the two writ petitions before the High Court were admitted as ordinary members of the appellant-society during the period from 1975-1979. The appellant-society's contention was that they became defaulters in payment of annual subscription for the relevant years and, therefore, ceased to be treated as ordinary members of the society and their membership automatically ceased as per earlier Rule 7 as well as the subsequent substituted Rule 7(A). Their names were, therefore, removed from the roll of members. Rule 7, which earlier stood on the Statute Book, was substituted by Rule 7(a) with effect from 30-3-1981. Though both the Rules are in pari materia, the operative Rule 7(A), which has been struck down by the High Court in the impugned judgment, squarely falls for our consideration.