ALL INDIA INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION Vs. DISTRICT REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All India Indian Overseas Bank Scheduled caste and Scheduled Tribe Welfare Association, the petitioner herein, seeks for the issue of a writ of declaration declaring the registration by the first respondent of the second respondent under the name of All India Overseas Bank Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Employees' Welfare Association as illegal and void and being violative of Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975.

(2.) The petitioner submits that it was duly registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, vide registration No.163, dated 22.7.1978. The Secretary of the petitioner Association states that motivated by self-interest, a group of a few employees led by one Myilvahanan attempted to thwart the legitimate activities of the petitioner Association by initiating litigation against the holding of election etc. The application filed by the said individuals were dismissed and the said individuals being unable to secure any support within the Association, the said individuals and few others floated a new body by name All India Overseas Bank Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Employees' Welfare Association. The petitioner had objected to the similarity in the name and recognition being accorded to the new body by the Registrar of Societies. Their objection was still pending.

(3.) Eariler, O.S.No.6749 of 1999 on the file of the District Munsif, Kancheepuram, was filed by the said Mayilvahanan purporting to be the General Secretary of the petitioner Association and he sought for an order of restraint as against the President P.Rajalingam and the General Secretary claiming that they had been removed from the petitioner Association, and the injunction application filed by the said Myilvahanan was dismissed on 7.12.1999. It is further stated that thereafter the said Myilvahanan set up five other individuals and filed a suit in O.S.No.976 of 1999. Several interlocutory reliefs were prayed for restraining the defendant (the petitioner herein) from operating the bank accounts etc. All the interlocutory applications were dismissed on 24.12.1999. It is further stated that the second respondent was interested only in furthering the selfish interests of a few individuals and that the said Association does not enjoy much support from the employees. The affidavit in support of the writ petition also contains certain other details of various controversies between the rival groups. The dispute appears to have arisen with reference to the visit of the Parliamentary Committee to Pondicherry to hear the grievances of SC/ST employees in the public sector and grievance of the petitioner appears to be that they were not intimated by the management. The said allegations are not directly relevant for the dispute which has been raised in this writ petition. In this writ petition, the correctness or otherwise of the registration of the second respondent Association, is questioned on the ground that the said Association bears similar name as that of the petitioner.