Court No. - 7
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31526 of 2019 Petitioner :- Satyavir Singh Kasana Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Sri Rajeev Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the proceedings under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act, registered as Reference No. 1939/2017 (Computerized Reference No. T-2017112816021939), Satyaveer Singh Kasana Vs. Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Meerut and Others, are pending before the Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Modinagar, Ghaziabad. He contends that the reference is pending for the past two years. The respondent nos. 4 and 5 are being inordinately delaying the proceedings.
The only prayer made by Sri Rajeev, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the reference may be decided within a stipulated period of time.
Sri S. P. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 submits that the respondent no. 5 have moved an application for transfer the reference, however, no order has been passed on the same.
Merely moving a transfer application is not a good ground to delay the proceedings of the reference.
Learned Standing Counsel submits that the prescribed authority is under obligation of law to decide the reference within a reasonable period of time.
In light of the submissions made by parties, matter is remitted to the respondent no. 2, Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Muradnagar, Ghaziabad.
A writ of mandamus is issued commanding the respondent no. 2, Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Muradnagar, Ghaziabad to decide the reference, under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act, registered as Reference No. 1939/2017 (Computerized Reference No. T-
2017112816021939), Satyaveer Singh Kasana Vs. Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Meerut and Others, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The reference shall be decided by a reasoned and a speaking order as per law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties.
It is open to the respondent no. 5 to pursue his remedy for transfer.
It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the veracity of the assertions made in the writ petition nor has the claim of the petitioner been judged on merits. It is for the competent authority to do so after independent application of mind in accordance with law.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 Dhananjai