- (1.) ANJANI Kumar, J. Heard Shri Yatindra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel, who has accepted notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 as well as Shri Indra Raj Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.
(2.) THE petitioners, by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have challenged the order dated 3rd March, 2003, passed by the Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi, copy whereof is appended as Annexure-'16' to the writ petition, whereby the Commissioner purporting to act under Section 12-D of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, as amended in the State of U. P. , set aside the order dated 4th April, 2002, passed by the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Varanasi Region, Varanasi by which the Assistant Registrar has granted renewal and registered the list of the management of Society produced before him. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in support of his contention relied upon the provision of Section 12-D of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, which is reproduced below: "12-D. Registrar's power to cancel registration in certain circumstances.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Registrar may, by order in writing, cancel the registration of any Society on any of the following grounds- (a) that the registration of the Society or of its name or change of name [is] contrary to the provisions of this Act, or of any other law for the time being in force; (b) that its activities or proposed activities have been or are or will be subversive of the objects of the Society or opposed to public policy; (c) that the registration or the certificate of renewal has been obtained by misrepresentation or fraud:] Provided that no order of cancellation of registration of any Society shall be passed until the Society has been given a reasonable opportunity of altering its name or object or of showing cause against the action proposed to be taken in regard to it. (2) An appeal against an order made under sub-section (1) may be preferred to the Commissioner of the Division in whose jurisdiction the Headquarter of the Society lies, within one month from the date of communication of such order. (3) The decision of the Commissioner under sub-section (2) shall be final and shall not be called in question in any Court. ]" Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners argued that in view of the provisions of Section 12-D of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, no appeal lies against the order impugned in the present writ petition, therefore, the order passed by the Commissioner, which is impugned in the present writ petition, is wholly without jurisdiction. A perusal of the Section 12-D of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, referred to above, clearly demonstrates that the contention of learned Counsel for the petitioners has substance.
(3.) SINCE it is agreed between the parties that in the present controversy pure questions of law are involved, therefore, there is no need to invite any counter-affidavit and the matter be decided finally. In view of what has been stated above, without entering into the merits of otherwise of this case, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 3rd March, 2004, Annexure '16' to the writ petition, is quashed. Petition allowed. .;