A.P.Misra, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and also learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) THROUGH this writ petition, the petitioner hat sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 the Manager, State Bank of India, Main Branch. Azamgarh not to sign any, cheques, bank drafts relating to the accounts of the Indian Red Cross Society, District Branch, District Azamgarh, under the signature of respondent no. 2 Ram Mohan Singh the then District Magistrate Azamgarh-cum-Ex-Officio President, of the said society and further directing the respondents nos. 1 to 4 to honour the cheques and drafts etc. of the Society under the signatures and authority of the (Honorary Treasurer) petitioner and the Honorary Secretary the Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Azamgarh. The petitioner alleges to be the Treasurer of the Indian Red Cross Society, District Branch, district-Azamgarh, This Society is working under the apex body which is Indian Red Cross Society, registered under the India Red Cross Societies. Act, 1920 (Act No XV of 1920) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The case of the petitioner is that Bye laws and Rules of every District Branch are constituted and are in conformity with the rules of the apex body as contemplated under section 5 of the Indian Red Cross Society Act. At the District Branch, District Magistrate is the Ex Officio President. District Inspector of Schools is the Ex Officio Vice President and the Deputy Chief Medical Officer is the Ex Officio Honorary Secretary. Apart from this, there is another Honorary Secretary to be non official who is elected by the Members of the District Branch Society with the District Managing Committee from amongst its members and there its one Treasurer who is appointed from amongst the Members by the District Managing Committee. The petitioner as aforesaid alleges to be the Treasurer elected by the District Managing Committee. He alleges his initial appointment in the year 1979 and is continuing thereafter. The mam grievance of the petitions Is that the President of Society has no authority nor is empowered under the rules framed to tigs the cheqes and operate the accounts of the Society himself but It has to be done only by the Honorary Secretary (Official) as well as Treasurer who have to sign the cheques jointly. The contention is that since the State Bank of India at Azamgarh permitted Sri Ram Mohan Singh the then District Magistrate to operate the accounts of the Society without signatures of the Honorary Secretery and the Treasurer, hence it is contrary to clause-5 of the rules which is the cause of action for filing the present writ petition. A further allegation made is that the then District Magistrate is beat upon in misusing and misutilising the fund of the society contrary to the objectives of the Society as envisaged by single operation. Hence the petitioner has sought for restraining the District Magistrate to operate the accounts singly. For this relief it is not necessary to refer other facts for the purpose of the disposal of the writ petition except the following further facts. Admittedly this Society is constituted under the aforesaid Act for the purpose of providing aid to the sick and wounded members of Armed Forces who carry on various activities of social welfare including maternity and child welfare, nursing and Ambulance work, making provision for relief for the mitigation of suffering caused by epidemic, earth quake femines, floods and other disasters. In every Province there is a state body of Indian Red Cross society. There are district branches of the said Society. The contention raised In the counter affidavit is that for the last tea years accounts of the Indian Red Cross Society at the district level are being operated by the Official Secretary and the president of the society. Further the counter affidavit denies that the petitioner is a validly elected treasurer of the society and further denies any mismanagement and misutilisation of the funds of the society.
(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, the only point pressed by the petitioner is that the District Magistrate should not operate the accounts of the Society singly. The fact that it can be operated jointly, is not dented either by the petitioner or by the respondent. What is contended Is that either it should be operated by the Honorary Secretary (Official) and the Treasurer or in absence of the Treasurer, by the President and Honorary Secretary. The question of the operation of the accounts singly by the District Magistrate is not the foundation of the respondeat to which the petitioner has strenuously urged. It seems that even during the pendency of the petition this Court as far back as on 11-1-1988 directed the operation of the accounts jointly by the District Magistrate and by one of the secretaries. Now we are not aware of the position, since then whether there is any change in the constitution or in the Committee or any fresh election has been made of any treasurer in accordance with law. Hence we are not adverting to that question in this writ petition. Even in the counter effidavit reliance has been placed by the respondent to clause- 5 of the Rules of District Branch at Azamgarh Relevant clause is quoted below : "5. The honorary treasurer shall be appointed by the Branch Committee at their first netting held after the annual general meeting every third year In special cases, it the Treasurer is cot appointed, the account shall be operated with the signatures of any two of the President and Honorary Secretaries." The said clause itself stipulates that in special case if the Treasurer is not appointed, account shall be operated with the signatures of President and the Honorary Secretary. Hence a Joint operation has to be made in the matter of operating any accounts of the Society.. We further find that the operation of the accounts of the Society is being operated jointly since 1988 and there is no dispute now that it has to be jointly operated as aforesaid. Annexure 1 to the supplementary affidavit is a letter date 12-10-1087 issued by Honorary Secretary, Indian Red Cross Society U.P. State Branch Lucknow, to which the petitioner relies, but, it is not necessary to go into it, as the rules itself are very clear and as we have pointed out earlier. Once a question of operation of accounts jointly is established' and not disputed by either of the parties, the main grievance of the petitioner falls. The question whether the petitioner is entitled to operate the account jointly along with the secretary, as we have already observed, is not necessary to go into it His election as Treasurer earlier itself has been challenged to which we are not adverting. Apart from petitioner alleging to be Treasurer at toe time of filing the. petition which is about 7 years back, and in the absence of any material on record about the position standing now it is not possible to give any direction in favour of the petitioner. It would be subject to the existing facts to it in accordance with the relevant rules and the observations made by us above.;