KISHORE RUNGTA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the writ petition, the petitioner has prayed to declare the Rajasthan Sports (Registration, Recognition and Regulation of Associations) Ordinance, 2004, which was later-on substituted by the Rajasthan Sports (Registration, Recognition and Regulation of Associations) Act, 2005 as unconstitutional, void and ultra vires the Constitution. Prayer has also been made to restrain the State Government or the Registrar of the Cooperative Societies from interfering in the working of the Rajathan Cricket Association and also from enforcing the provisions of the Act of 2005.

(2.) AT the outset, it may be mentioned that in the instant writ petition the original petitioners-Rajasthan Cricket Association (for short, 'the RCA') and Others had challenged the constitutional validity of the Rajasthan Sports Association (Registration, Recognition and Regulation) Ordinance, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Ordinance of 2004') and sought directions for restraining the State Government or the Registrar of the Cooperative Societies for the State from interfering in the working of the petitioner-RCA and from enforcing the provisions of the said Ordinance of 2004. The Division Bench of this Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, had dismissed the petition vide the order dated 20.12.2004. The said order came to be challenged by Shri Kishore Rungta, the then Secretary of the RCA by filing civil appeal being No.1206/2005 before the Supreme Court. During the pendency of the said appeal before the Supreme Court, the said Ordinance of 2004 came to be replaced by the Rajasthan Sports (Registration, Recognition and Regulation of Associations) Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act of 2005'), which received the assent of His Excellency the Governor of Rajasthan on 13.3.2005 and was published in the Official Gazette on 14.3.2005. In the meantime, the management and control of the RCA was also changed. The Apex Court, thereafter, disposed of the said civil appeal vide the order dated 20.1.2011. The Apex Court interalia passed the following order:-

(3.) S/Shri Paras Kuhad, Senior Advocate, with Sunil Nath, Vivek Dangi , Priyanka Nahata and Vishal Sharma appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that there is violation of the provisions contained in Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India; Act of 2005 takes away the fundamental right guaranteed by Article 19(1)(c); it puts restrictions on the exercise of right conferred under Article 19(1)(c); State could have acted within the parameter of Article 19(4) and none of the grounds envisaged under Article 19(4) is available; law enacted by the State is saved by the provisions of Article 19(4) and considering the ambit and sweep of fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(c), right to carry on objectives is part and parcel to right to form association, which has been taken away by the Act of 2005; Act of 2005 constitutes restrictions on exercise of right under Article 19(1)(c) and these restrictions could not have been imposed within Article 19(4) and could not be said to be reasonable restrictions.