Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has said that Registrars, acting under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, should not adjudicate private disputes between members or rival groups where determination of the dispute requires adjudication of civil rights.This would include, depending upon the facts of the case, disputes concerning membership, suspension of individual members, entitlement to hold a particular office, validity of an election or co-option, or competing claims to control the governing body, Justice Suraj Govindaraj has specified in his order passed on Oct 5 while issuing several guidelines on the issue.Where an election or management dispute is already pending before a competent civil court, the Registrar shall not undertake a parallel adjudication of the same issue under Section 25. The pendency of a civil suit shall not, by itself, prevent a genuine enquiry into the financial condition or statutory working of the society. The Registrar may continue such enquiry so long as he does not enter upon the adjudication of the civil rights which are pending before the court, the judge further added.Financial irregularities, misappropriation and improper use of society funds may properly be examined under Section 25. The Registrar shall, however, identify the financial or administrative issue under examination and shall not use such enquiry as a means of deciding rival claims to office or management. The power to order a further enquiry or re-enquiry, where permissible, does not enlarge the jurisdiction under Section 25. Every further enquiry must remain within the statutory field. A general clause permitting examination of “other irregularities” or matters discovered during enquiry cannot be treated as conferring unlimited jurisdiction. Any additional matter must independently fall within the subject matter contemplated by Section 25, Justice Govindaraj has further elaborated in his general guidelines.Fresh considerationAs regards the case on hand, the judge allowed the petition filed by Cosmopolitan Club, Bengaluru and quashed the notice issued by the Enquiry Officer and directed the said official to issue a fresh notice specifying the charges/matters proposed to be enquired into, after excluding matters which require adjudication of the private civil rights of the members and which are pending before the competent Civil Court.In particular, the Respondent shall not, in the fresh enquiry, adjudicate upon the validity of the appointment/co-option of, or continuance in office of, any member in office, the validity of the Special General Body Meeting dated Sept 22, 2024, the amendments to the Bye-laws, or any other issue which is directly pending adjudication before the Civil Court and/or matters which do not fall within the purview of constitution, working and financial condition of the Society, Justice Govindaraj has further observed in his order.
