IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2011 / 15TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18253 of 2011(F) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ PRINCE MATHEW ,S/O.A.J.MATHEW, AGED 48, ANTHOTTATHIL HOUSE, MUTTOM, MUTTOM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK. BY ADVS. SRI.K.C.CHARLES SRI.M.POLY MATHAI SRI.P.CHELLAPPAN SRI.E.N.HARI SRI.VIMAL K.CHARLES SMT.A.T.RENJU RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE RIFLE ASSOCIATION, REGISTRATION NO.A 426/2008 TRIVANDRUM, HEAD QUARTERS OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TRIVANDRUM-10,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEVASSYA KURIAN, VELANKUNNEL, CHITTALANCHERY P.O., PALAKKAD- 678 014. 2. KERALA SPORTS COUNCIL, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SPORTS GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.18253/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE BYELAW OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT ASSOCIATION. P2 COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, IDUKKI DATED 19/12/2008 SHOWING THE PETITIONER'S SELECTION AS THE SECRETARY OF DRAI. P3 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27/01/2010 ISSUED BY THE SPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA. P4 COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 05/06/2009 REGARDING THE ELECTION OF THE PETITION AS THE TREASURER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P5 COPY OF THE MINUTES DATED 09/06/2011 OF THE GENERAL BODY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT HELD ON 25/05/2011. P6(A) & (B) COPY OF THE LICENCE NO.519/XI AND 520/XI IS. P7 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 09/06/2011 FIXING THE DATE OF THE EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL BODY MEETING. P8 COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT ASSOCIATION DATED 08/01/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 18253 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an executive committee member of the first respondent. The first respondent has made certain amendments to its by-laws as a result of which, arms' dealer like petitioner are rendered ineligible to contest to its executive committee. This amendment, according to the petitioner is made, deliberately for the purpose of excluding him from contest. It is on this basis petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking to quash clause 23(c) of Ext.P1 bye-laws of the 1st respondent. 2. First respondent is a society registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literary Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act 1955. Petitioner has no case that the first respondent is incorporated by the State. On the other hand, the petitioner submits that the first respondent is amenable to writ jurisdiction for the reason W.P.(C) No. 18253 OF 2011 :2 : that the first respondent is a body affiliated to the 2nd respondent, a body incorporated under the Kerala Spots Act. It is also his contention that the first respondent is affiliated to National Rifle Association which is stated to be functioning under the control of Ministry of Sports and Welfare Affairs of Government of India. Further it is also pointed out that under S.13 of the Arms Act and Rules framed thereunder certain privileges are conferred on the first respondent. 3. In my view even if the aforesaid facts stated by the petitioner are accepted at its face value, those are no reason to hold the 1st respondent amenable to writ jurisdiction. To hold the 1st respondent “State or its instrumentality”, the 1st respondent should satisfy the tests indicated by this Court in Sophi v. FACT (1984 KLT 32). Even the petitioner has no case that those tests are satisfied. Therefore I am not satisfied that the first respondent is amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore the writ petition in my view is not maintainable and hence dismissed. W.P.(C) No. 18253 OF 2011 :3 : Though the writ petition is rejected, the right of the petitioner to move the appropriate civil court for the relief sought for is reserved. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/-