BAL VIKAS VIDYALAYA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 19/9/2023 passed by the Chairman-cum-Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna in Registration Case No. 30 of 2019, whereby and whereunder the appeal filed by the petitioner under Rule 22 (ii) of the Bihar Societies Registration Rules, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules, 2018'), challenging the order dtd. 26/11/2019 passed by the Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Registration (Society and Firm Registration), Department of Registration, Bihar, Patna i.e. the respondent no. 3, has been held to be not maintainable and accordingly the appeal has been disposed off. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing the order dtd. 26/11/2019, which though has been communicated by the respondent no. 3, however, the same has been passed by the Inspector General of Registration (I.G), Department of Registration, Bihar, Patna i.e. the respondent no.2, whereby and whereunder the District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram has been directed to conduct the election of Bal Vikas Samiti, Sasaram bearing Registration No. 58 of 1985-86 in terms of Rule 18 (iii) of the Rules, 2018.

(2.) The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that the petitioner i.e. Bal Vikas Vidyalaya is a progressive co- educational school duly affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi which was established on 14/1/1976 under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 having Registration No. 58 of 1985-86 dtd. 5/6/1984. The Managing Director of the petitioner is Gopal Narayan Singh. The respondent no. 5 i.e. Shri S.P. Verma, who was the earlier Chairman of the Managing Committee of Bal Vikas Vidyalaya, Sasaram (hereinafter referred to as the 'School'), subsequently showed his reluctance to continue, as such in his place one Shri L.M. Poddar was made Chairman vide resolution dtd. 9/5/2018 of the Managing Committee of the said School, which was unanimously confirmed vide resolution dtd. 15/7/2018. Consequently, Shri L.M. Poddar became the Chairman of the School, Shri Gopal Narayan Singh continued to be the Managing Director while one Shri Upendra Verma became the Assistant Director of the Managing Committee of the aforesaid School. The respondents no. 5 and 6, being anguished by the aforesaid development, questioned the resolution of the newly constituted Managing Committee although respondent no. 5 was himself a signatory to the said resolution and got a complaint filed before the respondent no. 2 on 20/9/2018 as also before the Assistant Registrar of Registration, Registration Department, Bihar, Patna on 15/11/2018, relating to irregularities being committed by the Managing Committee of the said School including financial irregularity being done by the outsiders and it was prayed that the same be enquired into by a government officer/committee and thereafter, appropriate action be taken. The petitioner had then filed its detailed reply to the aforesaid complaint on 27/2/2019 denying all the allegations levelled in the complaint as also it was stated therein that the complainant had no locus standi to file the said complaint, thus the complaint is fit to be dismissed. The petitioner had also raised the issue of maintainability of the complaint filed by the respondent no. 6 i.e. Rohit Verma on the following grounds:

(3.) The learned senior counsel for the petitioner Sri Y. V. Giri has stated that the petitioner had also raised the issue with regard to forged and fabricated bye-laws produced by the respondent no. 6 along with his complaint before the respondent Registration Department apart from raising the issue regarding the respondent no. 6 being a perpetual defaulter who has not paid the subscription money since several years. The Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Registration Department, Bihar, Patna had thereafter, submitted an enquiry report dtd. 18/4/2019, to which the petitioner had submitted para-wise reply on 13/8/2019. The respondent no. 3 had then vide Memo No. 540 dtd. 6/9/2019 communicated to the petitioner as well as to the respondent no. 6 to submit their para-wise reply to the enclosed questionnaire, whereafter the petitioner had submitted his para-wise reply on 22/10/2019. The respondent no. 3 had then, without granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, issued memo no. 737 dtd. 26/11/2019, addressed to the District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram, stating therein that a decision has been taken to get the election of Bal Vikas Vidyalaya Samiti conducted in which only valid members will participate, hence the District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram was requested to get the election of Bal Vikas Vidyalaya Samiti bearing Registration No. 58/1985-86 conducted with information to the Department. The petitioner had then challenged the said order dtd. 26/11/2019 passed by the respondent no. 3 by filing an appeal bearing Appeal No. 30 of 2019 before the Chairman-cum-Member Board of Revenue, Patna which was admitted vide order dtd. 10/2/2020 and the operative portion of the letter dtd. 26/11/2019 relating to conduct of election of Bal Vikas Vidyalaya Samiti was stayed. The matter was heard on several dates, however, in the meantime the respondent no. 6 had filed a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 7799 of 2023, which was heard by the Hon'ble Patna High Court, Patna and disposed off vide order dtd. 5/7/2023, with a direction to the appellate authority to dispose off the pending appeal by passing a reasoned and speaking order/judgment after hearing the respective parties within a period of six months. The aforesaid appeal was again heard by the Chairman-cum-Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna and the parties were directed to file their respective written submissions. The Chairman-cum-Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna by the impugned order dt. 19/9/2023 has disposed off the said appeal with an observation that the letter dt. 26/11/2019 written by the D.I.G., Registration to District Magistrate, Rohtas is a direction to conduct election in terms of Rule 18(iii) of the Rules, 2018, which is an interim order and not a final order, hence not appealable under Rule 22 of the Rules, 2018.