Full Text
Date of Decision: 05.12.2024
INDER MOHAN NAGPAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajesh Tyagi, Advocate.
Through: Mr. Tushar Sannu & Mr. Utkarsh Mishra, Advocates for R-1 & 2.
Ms. Sonia A. Menon & Ms. Varsha, Advocates for R-3.
JUDGMENT
1. The grievance of the Petitioner as articulated in the prayers to the present Petition reads as follows: “(i) Quash the Notification dated 3.9.2014 passed by the Respondent NO. 2, appointing the Managing Committee of the DSPCA.
(ii) Direct the Respondent No. 1 to restore the DSPCA, alongwith all records, assets and establishment to its members.
(iii) Pass any other or further order or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. This Court by its order dated 11.07.2024 had recorded that the Petitioner is not pressing his prayer clause (i) of the present Petition. It was further recorded on that date that the Petitioner has submitted that he is entitled to receive the entire record, assets and other belongings/goods of the Respondent No.3/Association.
3. The record shows that the Petition has been filed by an individual, who states himself to be a life member of Delhi Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (DSPCA).
4. Notice in this Petition was issued on 31.05.2017. The Counter- Affidavit was filed by the Respondent No.3/DSPCA through its Secretary. 4.[1] By an order dated 01.10.2018, a Coordinate Bench of this Court had recorded the contentions of Respondent No.1 and 2, that they will be adopting the Counter-Affidavit filed by the Respondent No.3.
5. It is the case of the Petitioner that DSPCA was registered in the year 1928 with the Registrar of Societies.
6. This Court after briefly hearing the matter on 28.10.2024, had recorded the following:
7. As can be seen from the above, the Petitioner on 28.10.2024 had sought to draw a distinction between Delhi Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - a voluntary body and Respondent No.3 Society. The Respondents, on the other hand, had contended that Respondent No.3 is a registered society working under the aegis of Respondent No. 1 and 2 and there is only one society. Reliance was placed on a Gazette notification dated 23.02.2010 issued by the Respondent No. 1 to submit that Respondent No. 3/Society works under the aegis of Respondent No. 1/GNCTD.
8. Learned Counsel for Respondent No.3 has also raised a preliminary objection to the Petition being barred by delay and latches. It is contended that Respondent No.2 had appointed an administrator in the year 1990 and since that period, the society is functioning under the administrator appointed by Respondent No.1/GNCTD.
9. The record shows that the Petitioner had on 11.07.2024 limited himself for a direction “to restore DSPCA, alongwith all records, assets and establishment to its members”. Subsequently, the Petitioner had on 28.10.2024, sought time to place on record his authorization to act in favour of the DSPCA. 9.[1] No authorization has been placed on record by the Petitioner.
10. In view of the fact that no document for authorization has been placed on record by the Petitioner in support of his contentions that he is representing DSPCA, this Court for redressal of his grievances, is unable to accede to his prayers.
11. The present Petition, along with pending application, is disposed of, granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach a Civil Court in accordance with law.
12. It is clarified that this Court has not undertaken and examination on merits. All rights and contentions of both the parties are left open.