PRASANTA KUMAR JOSHI Vs. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application, the Petitioner has challenged the Order Dated 9.10.2009 passed by the Inspector General of Registration (IGR), Cuttack approving reconstituted Governing Body & the amended bye -law of Mahila Vikash (NGO), Tarbod in the district of Nuapada.

(2.) MAHILA Vikash, Tarbod in the district of Nuapada is a nongovernmental organisation established under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter called "the Act") in the year 1994 & duly registered before Opp. Party No. 1 bearing Registration No. 19474/87 of 1993 -94. The Petitioner claim's to be the Founder Member -cum -Treasurer of the said organisation. Opp. Party No. 2 is the Under Secretary (Registration) Office of the Inspector General of Registration, Cuttack. Opp. Party No. 4 is the Founder Member -cum -Secretary of the said organisation. As per the bye -law, both the Petitioner & Opp. Party No. 2 are joint signatories in respect of any transaction with the Bank. The organisation has been running smoothly with the cooperation of all members & District Administration & funding agencies. As per the bye -law, the Governing Body of the said Organisation was constituted consisting of the Chairman, Vice -Chairman, Secretary, Treasurer & General Body Members & it has been running the Society from the date of its foundation.

(3.) THE Petitioner received an information that a sum of Rs. 2,30,319 was to be withdrawn from the Accounts of the Organisation by Opp. Party No. 4. Hence, he filed objection before the IGR, Cuttack not to approve the allegedly reconstituted Governing Body & the amended bye -law. As regards the illegal withdrawal of money, he intimated all the Banks not to allow any withdrawal from the Bank. He also filed ICC Case No. 36 of 2008 before the Learned S.D.J.M., Nuapada which is pending. The anticipatory bail application filed by Opp. Party No. 4 was rejected by this Court. The IGR, Cuttack also requested the Addl. District Magistrate - cum -District Registrar, Nuapada to enquire into the matter & submit his report. In his turn, on 21.1.2009 the Addl. District Magistrate, enquired into the matter & submitted his report (vide Annexure -1) holding that the reconstitution of the Governing Body of the Organisation, removal of the Petitioner & withdrawal of money by Opp. Party No. 4 were illegal. The IGR on receiving the said enquiry report & after perusal of the entire record, by his Order Dated 17.3.2009 rejected the proposed amendment of bye -law due to procedural irregularity & also the constitution of the Governing Body. Opp. Party No. 4 neither challenged the said order nor preferred any writ application. A meeting of the Executive Body was convened on 19.4.2009 at Bhubaneswar & the present Petitioner was asked to attend the same. By the time the Petitioner arrived there, nobody was present there except Opp. Party No. 4. He was insisted to sign on the blank Resolution Book which the Petitioner refused.