Collection Of Material By Registrar is Not Necessary Before Initiating Suo Moto Enquiry U/S 32 MP Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam: High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, held that collection of material by Registrar is not necessary before initiating suo moto enquiry under section 32 of MP society registrikaran Adhiniyam.
This was seen in the case, EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH IN MP (ELC IN MP) VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH(WRIT PETITION No. 11109 of 2021), presided over by Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The Society claims it to be a registered Society under the Madhya Pradesh Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973 (for short “the Adhiniyam, 1973”). That it is running many educational institutions as well as hospitals in the State of M.P. It conducts various charitable activities.
A complaint was made to the Hon’ble Minister, State of M.P. Various allegations were made about the irregularities being conducted by the petitioner, Thereafter the Registrar, exercising his power under Section 32 of the Adhiniyam, initiated an enquiry suo moto against the functioning of the Petitioner Society.
The Petitioner submitted before the Court that the Registrar went beyond his jurisdiction to initiate the enquiry, Society is beyond the authorization of law. That the Registrar had no power to pass the impugned order.
Per contra, the State argued that the Registrar exercised his powers within the four corners of law and that the petition was liable to be dismissed.
JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT
The court held that, the plain reading of Section 32 does not indicate so. It only indicates that the Registrar on his own motion or on an application may initiate an enquiry. Therefore, the suo motu power granted to the Registrar is bereft of any finding or material or any other action prior to exercising of powers under Section 32 of the Adhiniyam, 1973.
With the aforesaid observations, the Court held that proceedings initiated by the Registrar were just and proper and were bereft of any interference by the Minister or any third party. Hence, the petition was dismissed.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY VYSHNAVI KRISHNAN.