CHANDRASEKHARA BHARATHI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the petitioner claims to be the elected president of the navodaya education society registered under the Karnataka societies Registration Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act')- it is alleged that he has been the elected president for a long time; that he was reelected on 1-5-1983 at a general body meeting called by the 3rd respondent who was the secretary at the relevant time. Strangely, the secretary convened the general meeting but did not attend the general meeting held on 1-5-1983. At that meeting, the petitioner was elected president and one m.s. maramardhana was elected as secretary. In accordance with the requirement of Section 13 of the Act, the new secretary field the return indicating the names of the new committee of management or governing body elected at the meeting held on 1-5-1983 presided over by the petitioner Sri chandrasekhara bharati swamigalu. Petitioner has further alleged that on the same day, namely, 1-5-1983 at tiptur, the former secretary, namely 3rd respondent m. Renukarya, a lecturer of kalpatharu college of tiptur also convened a general meeting at which another managing committee consisting of 20 members was elected and the said renukarya was elected as the secretary. In compliance with the requirement of Section 13 of the Act, on 16-5-1983 he filed a return purporting to be the list of members of the governing body elected at the meeting held on 1-5-1983. The district registrar appears to have taken both the returns on file. Objecting to the same, the petitioner field an application stating that the second return should be rejected as it was filed beyond 14 days prescribed under Section 13 of the act and for other reasons stated. In view of the controversy involved, the district registrar-respondent No. 2 gave notice to all parties concerned in proceedings initiated as s.o.c. No. 17/1980-81. After giving adequate opportunities to the parties before him in such proceedings including the petitioner, he first appointed an ad hoc committee consisting of 11 members, which did not exclude the secretary renukarya, to be in charge of the affairs of the society and the educational institutions run by it he, however, having regard to the dismal state of affairs obtaining in the management of the society and the institutions run by it directed that the ad hoc committee must be in charge till the government appointed an administrator for which he was making recommendation in terms of Section 27-a of the act..

(2.) aggrieved by that Order, the petitioner has challenged the legality and correctness of the order as at Annexure-D , dated 30-11-1983. Similarly, by another petition, 3rd respondent renukarya the secretary who had been re- elected at a meeting not presided over by the petitioner on 1-5-1983 held at tiptur has presented writ petition No. 1307/1984 challenging the very same order.

(3.) the two writ petitions had been clubbed together for being heard. It was submitted on behalf of the counsel for petitioner in W.P. No. 1307/1984 that he is bed-ndden and unable to attend the court and therefore the matter may be adjourned. Having regard to the fact that the petitions are nearly 8 years old and further having regard to the fact that the government have not passed any order on the recommendation made on the impugned order to supercede the committee, we propose to dispose of the writ petition filed by the petitioner chandrasekhara bharathi swamigalu after hearing the learned counsel Sri m. Mahabaleshwara goud. In that view of the matter, we have separated W.P. No. 1307/1984 to be heard independently when the counsel for the petitioner recovers from his illness and is able to appear before this court.