D.N. Patel, J. - (1.) This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order delivered by the learned Single Judge in writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 2045 of 2014 dated 14.07.2015 whereby, petition preferred by this appellant was dismissed, hence, the original petitioner has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal.
(2.) Factual Matrix • This appellant, M/s Maharshi Nikhilesh Sewa Sansthan and several other persons are ready to serve this institution which is most important difficulty. Every body is narrating himself as best servant of this institution and one of them is this petitioner and another is respondent no.4 and still 3rd party is also there namely, Rajesh Kumar. Their anxiety to serve this appellant-M/s Maharshi Nikhilesh Sewa Sansthan has given rise more than half a dozen litigations. • It is alleged by this appellant that Jyoti Swarup is claiming to be the President of this appellant - M/s Maharshi Nikhilesh Sewa Sansthan. That one Rajesh Kumar, who was the Treasurer, has resigned from the M/s Maharshi Nikhilesh Sewa Sansthan and similar situated two other persons had also resigned, and therefore, an application was preferred, which is at Annexure-10 to this memo of this Letters Patent Appeal, before the Inspector General (Registration) on 07.10.2007 under Section 4A of the Society Registration Act, 1860. • As several persons had resigned from the appellant - M/s Maharshi Nikhilesh Sewa Sansthan, an application was needed to be filed and ultimately Inspector General (Registration) allowed this amendment which was carried out on 05.11.2007. Thus, on 07.08.2006 and 31.08.2007, respondent no.4 as well as one Rajesh Kumar and one more person who had resigned from the appellant - M/s Maharshi Nikhilesh Sewa Sansthan and necessary amendment was carried out on 05.11.2007. • Respondent No. 4 as well as one more person who resigned from this appellant - M/s Maharshi Nikhilesh Sewa Sansthan filed a title suit being Title Suit No.268 of 2007 before the lowest available Civil Courts, i.e., the Court of Munsif, Ranchi and the suit is pending. • On 09.01.2010 one Rajesh Kumar, who also resigned, preferred an application for amendment before the Inspector General (Registration). The Inspector General (Registration) allowed such type of application preferred by Rajesh Kumar without proper verification and without looking to the earlier order dated 07.10.2007 and without joining Jyoti Swarup as party respondent. This application of Rajesh Kumar was allowed by the Inspector General (Registration) on 15.03.2010. • This order of Inspector General (Registration) was challenged by Jyoti Swarup who is a President of this appellant - M/s Maharshi Nikhilesh Sewa Sansthan in writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 1887 of 2010, (this number is supplied by the counsel for the appellant). Similarly, the respondent no.4 has also preferred writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 6070 of 2012 before this High Court challenging the order passed by the Inspector General (Registration) dated 17.07.2012. • Meanwhile, Inspector General (Registration) was also holding enquiry, and hence, writ petition being W.P. (C) No. 1887 of 2012 was disposed of with a direction that the this appellant can assist Inspector General (Registration) for holding proper enquiry. • Ultimately, Inspector General (Registration) completed the enquiry and passed an order on 17.07.2012 that the order, which was passed by him on 15.03.2010 at the behest of Rajesh Kumar, was obtained by fraud. Fraud vitiates the whole proceedings. Ultimately, the order dated 15.03.2010 was quashed and set aside. Thus, order dated 05.11.2007 remained intact which is in favour of appellant, Jyoti Swarup. • Simultaneously, a writ petition which was preferred by respondent No.4 being W.P.(C) No. 6070 of 2012 came for hearing and it was decided by this Court as the statutory appeal under Section 23 of the Society Registration Act, 1860 is available to this petitioner, the writ was disposed of with a liberty to the respondent no.4 to prefer a statutory appeal with all delay condonation application etc. under Section 14 of Bihar Society Registration Rules, 1965 enacted under the Society Registration Act, 1860. • Thereafter, respondent no.4 as well as Rajesh Kumar has preferred miscellaneous appeal being M.A. No.10 of 2013 before Board of Revenue, State of Jharkhand, without delay condonation application and without joining this Jyoti Swarup, who is President of appellant - M/s Maharshi Nikhilesh Sewa Sansthan, as a party respondent and that to though he was a party respondent in W.P.(C) No.6070 of 2010. • M.A. No.10 of 2013 was allowed by Board of Revenue, State of Jharkhand vide order dated 22.01.2014 without condoning the delay and in absence of this Jyoti Swarup, President of M/s Maharshi Nikhilesh Sewa Sansthan • Hence, this appellant preferred writ petition being W.P.(C) No.2045 of 2014 before this Court challenging the order passed by the Board of Revenue, State of Jharkhand dated 22.01.2014 passed in M.A. No.10 of 2013. This writ petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 14.07.2015, and hence, original petitioner has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal mainly on the grounds that:- (a) Without any delay condonation application and without condoning the delay, miscellaneous appeal being M.A. No.10 of 2013, preferred by the respondent No. 4, has been allowed (b) Though this appellant was a party in writ petition being W.P.(C) No.6070 of 2012, which was preferred by respondent no.4, this appellant was never joined as a party respondent in M.A. No.10 of 2013. Thus, there was non-joinder of the party as these two grounds were not properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge, this Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the original petitioner.
(3.) Argument canvassed by the learned counsel for the appellant (original petitioner). • Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 10 of 2013 before Board of Revenue, State of Jharkhand, no delay condonation application was preferred whereas, there was a gross delay in preferring the miscellaneous appeal and the Board of Revenue, State of Jharkhand without delay condonation application and without condoning the delay has allowed the Miscellaneous Appeal No.10 of 2013 vide order dated 22.01.2014. This aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition and hence, the order dated 14.07.2015 passed in W.P.(C) No.2045 of 2014 deserves to be quashed and set aside. • It is further submitted by the counsel for the appellant (original petitioner) that in earlier writ petition being W.P.(C) No.6070 of 2012 preferred by the respondent no.4, this appellant was a party respondent. This writ petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge because statutory appeal was available to the respondent no.4. After the disposal of writ petition being W.P.(C) No.6070 of 2012 when the respondent no.4 preferred Miscellaneous Appeal No.10 of 2013, respondent no.4 ought to have joined this appellant as a party respondent in Miscellaneous Appeal No.10 of 2013, but for any reasons whatsoever this respondent no.4 had not joined this appellant as a party respondent whereas, there was already an order dated 05.11.2007 passed by the Inspector General (Registration) in favour of this appellant. These facts were also known to respondent no.4 despite this fact, this appellant was not joined as a party respondent in Miscellaneous Appeal No.10 of 2013. Thus, there was non-joinder of the party. This aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge, and hence, also the order passed in W.P.(C) No.2045 of 2014 dated 14.07.2015 deserves to be quashed and set aside.;