- (1.) R. A. Sharma, J. Sri Krishna Educational Society (hereinafter referred to as the Society) is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). As there was delay in the renewal of registration of the society, Sri Mahedeo Rai got a fresh registration as its Manager. Sri Awadh Misir moved an application on 10-7-1979 for cancellation of the registration granted at the instance of Mahadeo Rai on which notice was issued to Sri Mahadeo Rai by the Assistant Registrar. He not having responded to the said notice, the Assistant Registrar issued a notice dated 14-7-1980 for cancellation of the registration under Section 12-D of the Act mentioning therein that the registration has been obtained due to fraud and misrepresentation. Sri Mahadeo Rai made a representation in response to the said notice. The Assistant Registrar vide order dated 16-8-1980 cancelled the registration granted in favour of Sri Mahadeo Rai. By another order dated 16-9-1980 the Registrar granted the renewal of the registration certificate of the society to Sri Awadh Misir. Petitioners being aggrieved by the above order of the Registrar, cancelling the registration certificate granted to Sri Mahadeo Rai, filed an appeal before the State Government, which has been dismissed on 3-11-1981. Hence they have filed this writ petition, challenging the show cause notice dated 14-7-1981, the order dated 16-8-1980, cancelling the registration granted in favour of Sri Mahadeo Rai, order of the State Government dated 3-11-1981 and the order dated 16-9-1980 granting renewal to Sri Awadh Misir.
(2.) THIS writ petition was allowed by this Court on 5-1-1990 on this ground that the impugned orders did not contain any reasons. THIS decision was challenged by Sri Awadh Misir before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3539 of 1990. Supreme Court set aside the judgment of this Court holding that the orders of the two authorities read with show cause notice clearly indicate that the reasons have been recorded and this Court has allowed the petition by overlooking the same. Matter was accordingly remanded to this Courts for deciding the petition afresh, We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. Learned Counsel for both the parties have also filed written argument and we have perused the same. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has raised seven points in support of the writ petition, namely, (i) clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 12-D of the Act, which provides for cancellation of the registration certificate, if it was obtained by fraud or misrepresentation, was added i or the first time in 1984 and, therefore, the registration certificate could not have been cancelled prior to 1984 on the ground of fraud and mis-presentation, (ii) Registrar has no power to review his order granting regis tration ; (iii) no opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioners before cancelling the fresh registration ; (iv) State Government also did not provide an opportunity of being heard before dismissing the appeal; (v) the dispute falls within Section 25 of the Act, which can be decided by the Prescribed Authority and as such, the impugned order of the Registrar cancelling the registration is without jurisdiction ; (vi) the orders are non-speaking orders ; and (vii) grant of renewal of registration to Sri Awadh Misir was not justified till the registration granted in favour of the petitioners was cancelled. All these submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioners are devoid of merits.
(3.) POINTS Nos. 1 and 2 being inter-linked are to be decided together. Section 12-D, so far as it is relevant, is reproduced herein below : "12-D. Registrar's power to cancel Registration in certain circum stances.- (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 ;" It is settled that even if an authority has no power to review its decision, it can lays recall or revoke it, if it is obtained by fraud, misrepresentation or mistake. In this connection reference may be made to R. S. Chaubey v. D. I. O. S. , 1977 ALJ 451, Committee of Management v. D. 1. O. S. 1979 ALJ 33 ; Mohan Lal Sharma v. D. 1. O. S. , 1982 UPLBEC 213, and Gauri Shanker Rai v. Dr. Ram Lakhan Pandey, 1984 UPLBEC 166, clause (c) has made explicit what is implicit in every power. Both the contentions, as such, have no merit. The 3rd and 4th contentions also deserve the same fact. Petitioners were given a show-cause notice before cancelling the registration certificate, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure XI to the writ petition. Peti tioners filed representation in response thereto and it is thereafter that the Registrar cancelled the registration certificate. After the petitioners filed an appeal, the State Government vide letter dated 9-4-1981 asked the petitioners to file evidence, if any, in their support. Petitioners in response to the above notice filed the papers on which they wanted to rely upon in their support. Thereafter the Government after considering the material on record dismissed the appeal of the petitioners. Petitioners were, thus, given full opportunity before registration certificate was cancelled and the appeal was dismissed.;