IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 21170 of 2004 Between: 1 The Andhra Pradesh Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association, Registered No. R.C. 600/2004, Rep. by its President Sri K. Gopala Krishna 2 Sri K. Gopala Krishna, S/o Sri Rangaiah, The Andhra Pradesh Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Excise Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Special Chief Secretary, Revenue ( R & M) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and Stamps, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 3 The Registrar of Societies, Registration and Stamps Department, Andhra Pradesh,Nampally, Hyderabad. 4 Sri K.R. Suryanarayana, s/o Sri K.V.N. Sarma, O/o Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Nampally, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order, direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the proceedings of the 1st Respondent issued in Memo No. 27168/R & M (2)/2004-2 dated 28-10-2004 is illegal, arbitrary and is one issued without power and authority and further it is violative of Article 14 and 19 and 1 (C) of the Constitution of India apart from violative of Principles of Natural Justice and further declare that the consequential proceedings of the 3rd respondent issued in No. 5588/Society/2004, dated 10-11-2004 are also illegal, and arbitrary Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.SURENDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent : GP FOR REVENUE FOR R1 TO 3 The Court made the following : HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE G. YETHIRAJULU W.P.No.21170 of 2004 and C.R.P.No.3511 of 2007 COMMON ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioners against the respondents seeking to declare that the proceedings of the first respondent, dated 28- 10-2004 and the consequential proceedings of the third respondent, dated 10-11-2004 are illegal, arbitrary, without power and authority and violative of Articles 14 to 19 of the Constitution of India. 2. The averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition are briefly as follows: The second petitioner and other Non Gazetted Officers of the A.P. Commercial Taxes Department wanted to have an Association as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association and they decided to register the Society. Under the A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001 (for short ‘the Act’), no society shall be registered except with the previous sanction of the Government in writing. They requested the Government of Andhra Pradesh to permit them to register the Society as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association. The Government of Andhra Pradesh through the proceedings, dated 27-03-2004, accorded permission to the petitioners society after obtaining views from the Inspector General of Registration and Stamps. Later, the society was registered as Andhra Pradesh Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association with Registration No.600/2004. The petitioners further averred that one K.R. Suryanarayana, who was styling as President of A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association, filed W.P.No.8967 of 2004 alleging that the registration of the petitioners society, after obtaining permission accorded by the Government, is not legal. A learned single Judge of this Court disposed of the writ petition directing the petitioner in the said writ petition to make a representation to the Government and further directed the Government to pass appropriate orders on such representation in accordance with law. The said K.R. Surayanarayana alleged that the employees of the Commercial Taxes Department have originally formed into a Guild known as A.P. Commercial Taxes Employees Guild, which was recognized by the Government vide G.O.Rt.No.386, G.A., Services-C Department, dated 18- 06-1968. The Guild comprised non Gazetted and Gazetted officers and Class-IV employees. Subsequently in the year 1975, the A.P. Commercial Taxes Gazetted Officers Association was separately registered and recognized by the Government in 1996. The Class-IV employees Association was also registered separately in 1986 and their Association remained as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association which was accorded recognition in 1994. The A.P. Non Gazetted Officers Association by deleting Class-IV Employees Association cannot automatically become A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association without there being amendment and corresponding entries in the register of the Association. Since no such amendment was made by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, the Society represented by K.R. Surayanarayana cannot be recognized as a registered society. When K.R. Suryanarayana called General Body Meeting of their Association on 01-06-2004, the petitioners filed O.P.No.7 of 2004 and obtained an injunction restraining them from conducting General Body Meeting for the purpose of electing their Executive, but, after filing of the Counter, erroneously dismissed the injunction petition by vacating the stay. Later, the Government on a representation made by the said K. R. Suryanarayana withdrew the permission granted to the petitioners society and directed that the words “Andhra Pradesh” shall be deleted from the name of the Society registered with registration No.100/2004. The said order was passed by the Government without giving notice to the petitioners. The Act does not empower any authority to effect or change or amend any bye-laws without the amendments being carried out by the Society and without any request made by the society in that behalf. Thus, the impugned order, dated 28-10-2004 is illegal and without any authority. When the petitioners filed a reply to the notice issued by the District Registrar for deletion of the words “Andhra Pradesh” from the name of their society, the Registrar confirmed the earlier stand and issued proceedings rejecting their claim, therefore, the present writ petition seeking the reliefs as mentioned above. 3. The counter affidavit was filed by the District Registrar with the following contentions in brief: At the request of the petitioners, the petitioners society was registered under the Act after obtaining the permission by them from the Government to register the Society as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association. The fourth respondent filed W.P.No.8967 of 2004 questioning the permission granted by the first respondent and registration by the third respondent. In pursuance of the direction given in the writ petition, the fourth respondent made an Application before the Government challenging the permission accorded to the petitioners by contending that the Government of Andhra Pradesh accorded permission to the A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers and Class IV Employees Association in 1972 which was registered with registration No.725/1972. Later when Gazetted Officers and Class IV Employees Association formed their separate Associations, the name of the Association is amended as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association and since then, the said Association has been running as such. In view of the registration of the amended name of the Association in 1981, the Government through the memo, dated 27-03- 2004 accorded permission to the petitioners to use the same name once again and created confusion in the minds of the people. The first respondent, having considered the representation and the material available on record, noticed that there exists another society with the same name in the year 1981 and accordingly, recalled the permission dated 27-03-2004. If there is existence of any society with identical name, there cannot be any other society as it is prohibited under Section 6 of the Act. As the registration of the subsequent society is with the identical name, the Government recalled the permission, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. The fourth respondent filed a separate counter affidavit, wherein he reiterated the facts mentioned in the writ petition and the counter affidavit of the respondents 1 to 3 regarding the existence of a society and registration of an identical society subsequently. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners Sri Surendar Rao submitted that the petitioners society was registered in the name and style as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association in 2004. By that date, the Association represented by the fourth respondent was known as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association and it cannot be recognized by the Government as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association without there being any amendment to the bye laws or amendment noted by the Registrar of the Societies in the relevant registers of the Societies, therefore, it shall be deemed that there was no similar Association in existence by the date of registration of the petitioners society. He further submitted that though there is a prohibition under Section 6 (2) (a) of the Act for registration of the society with identical name, there was no such society in existence as on the date of registration of the petitioners society, therefore, the Government ought not have passed an order withdrawing permission for registration of such society and the District Registrar ought not have directed the society to remove the words “Andhra Pradesh” from the name of the society. Hence, he requested to set aside the impugned orders of the respondents 1 and 3. 6. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the society represented by the fourth respondent was in existence since 1972 as A.P. Commercial Taxes Employees Guild. Subsequently, the Gazetted Officers formed a separate Association and got it registered and Class-IV employees also separated from the said Association and got registered separately, therefore, the A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association remained, which was recognized with the said name by the Government through G.O.Ms.No.217, dated 26-04- 1994. When the Society was in existence representing its members to the Government to protect the interests of the Non Gazetted Officers, the petitioners who came out of the said Association wanted to form a parallel Association to create confusion among the Non Gazetted Officers of the department and also the general public. If the petitioners society is allowed to continue with the same name, the people are likely to get confused and it is prohibited under Section 6 of the Act, therefore, the Government was right in withdrawing the permission for the registration of the Society in the name and style of A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association and the respondents were right in passing the impugned order and there are no grounds to set aside the same. 7. In the light of the contentions raised by the learned counsel for both parties, the point for consideration is whether the petitioners are entitled for the reliefs as prayed for? 8. G.O.Ms.No.217, General Administration (SCR.WEL) Department, dated 26-04-1994 was issued recognizing the A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association represented by the fourth respondent. In the said G.O., it was mentioned by the Government that the President of the A.P. Commercial Taxes N.G.Os Association in the representations, dated 28-08-1993 and 23-11-1993 requested to change the name of the A.P. Commercial Taxes Employees Guild into A.P. commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association and to grant membership in the State Level Joint Staff Council and O.D. Facility. It is further mentioned that in G.O.Ms.No.386, GAD, dated 18-06-1968, the Government have accorded recognition to the A.P.C.T. Employees Guild subject to the condition that a Member of this Guild should not be a Member in another Association and also subject to the condition laid down in Rule 3 of the A.P.C.S. Rules 1962. Subsequently, the Gazetted Officers of the Commercial Taxes Department have formed into a separate Association known as A.P.C.T. Officers Association and it was recognized by the Government in their G.O.Ms.No.422 GA (Ser.) Department, dated 22-05-1976. Thus, the A.P.C.T. Employees Guild has split into two Associations by virtue of disassociation of Gazetted Officers from the Guild and recognition of separate Association by the Government. The Commercial Taxes Employees Guild is no longer representing all the employees of Commercial Tax Department as the Gazetted Officers ceased to be the members of the Guild. The A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association has now approached the Government for the change of the name and nomenclature as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association. On the basis of the resolution passed by the General Body to that effect and after careful examination of the matter, the Government has decided and, in exercises of the power conferred under the Act and Rules, accorded permission to change the name of the A.P.C.T. Employees Guild into A.P.C.T. NGOs Association and recognize the said Association for the purpose of enabling the Government employees who are the members of the said Association to make representation regarding their conditions of service and matters pertaining thereto for any redress. It is also directed that the Association should submit a representation to the Government through the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and communicate to the Government any change in its Rules or bye-laws and also changes that may be made in its name, address or headquarter etc. 9. From the above G.O., it is very clear that the amendment of the name has been recognized by the Government and approved the same for the purpose of making representations to the Government. 10. Through the resolution, dated 25-01-1981, the A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers and Class-IV Association has been amended as the Andhra Pradesh Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers in short A.P.C.T. NGOs Association. This resolution was communicated to the Registrar of Societies by the General Secretary of the said Association. The bye-laws were also amended to that effect. When the fourth respondent questioned the proceedings of the Government according permission for registration through the writ petiton, the writ petition was disposed by this Court directing that the matter shall be decided by the competent authority. On 28-10-2004, on a representation made by the fourth respondent, the Government, after careful consideration of the entire material, recalled the order, dated 27- 03-2004 immediately according permission for registration of the petitioners society. The Registrar of the Societies, in pursuance of the order passed by the Government, directed the President of the Petitioners society to delete the words “Andhra Pradesh” from the name of the society and further ordered that it shall be deemed to be non-existence from the date of registration of the society. The request made by the Society was also rejected by observing that there are no grounds to interfere with the same. There was a communication from the petitioners Society to the Government requesting to issue instructions to the Registrar of the Societies to register their Society in the name of the A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association. 11. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner cited the following decisions of the Supreme Court, in my considered view, they are not applicable to the facts of the present case: ENTERTAINMENT TAX OFFICER, HYD. v. HI TECH THEATRE, HYD [1], RANI LAXMIBAI KSHETRIYA, GRAMIN BANK v. CHAND BEHARI KAPOOR [2] and MANAGING COMMITTEE, KHALSA MIDDLE SCHOOL v. MOHINDER KAUR [3]. 12. Section 6 of the Act reads as follows: 6. Societies not to be registered with undesirable names: - - (1) No society shall be registered by a name which contravenes the provisions of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of the Improper Use) Act, 1950 (Central Act 12 of 1950). (2) (a) No society shall be registered in a District by a name, which is identical with that of another registered society in existence in the same District or so nearly resembling it so as to mislead except where the registered society in existence is in the course of being dissolved and signifies in writing its consent to such registration. (b) Except with the previous sanction in writing of the Government, no society shall be registered by a name which contains any of the following words, namely:-- (i) “Co-operative” or “Land Development:; (ii) “Reserve Bank”; (iii) “Union” or “State” or any word expressing or implying the sanction, approval or patronage of the Central Government or any State Government; and (iv) “Municipal or “Chartered” or any word which suggest or is calculated to suggest connection with any municipality or other local authority: Provided that nothing in this section shall apply to the societies registered before the date of commencement of this Act. (3) A society may, by a special resolution change it’s name, with a previous intimation to the Registrar in writing. (4) The change of name shall not affect any right or obligation of the society or any member thereof or render defective any action or other legal proceedings by or against it and any of the members, and any action or other legal proceedings which might have been continued or commenced by or against the society by its former name may be continued or commenced by or against the society by its new name. Section 8 of the Said Act reads as follows: 8. Amendment of memorandum and Bye-laws:-- (1) By a “Special Resolution” a society may alter the provisions of the memorandum with respect to,-- (a) change of objectives of the society; (b) to amalgamate itself with any other society; or (c) to divide itself into two or more societies. (2) Subject to the provisions of this Act, and the conditions contained in its memorandum, a society may, by an ordinary resolution passed by not less than 1/2 (half) of the members present and voting alter its bye-laws. (3) Any alteration of the memorandum of the society shall not be valid unless such alteration is registered under this Act. (4) If any alteration of the memorandum is filed with the Registrar and if they are not contrary to the provisions of this Act, he shall register the same and shall certify the registration of such alteration under his hand and seal within thirty days from the date of receipt of the resolution. The certificate shall be conclusive evidence that all the requirements of this Act with respect to the alteration and the certification thereof have been complied with and henceforth the memorandum as so altered shall be the memorandum of the society. (5) Every alteration in the bye-laws of the society should be sent to the Registrar and he shall take it on record if it is not contrary to the provisions of this Act. From the reading of Section 6 (2) (a), it is clear that no society, which is identical with that of another registered society in existence in the same District or so nearly resembling it so as to mislead, shall not be registered under this Act unless the previous registered society is being dissolved and signified in writing its consent to such registration. 13. From the above material, it is clear that the society represented by the fourth respondent was registered in one form or the other since 1972 with all the employees including Gazetted Officers, Non Gazetted Officers, Class-IV employees etc. After separation of class-IV employees and Gazetted Officers Association, the Society was registered as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association and when there is a resolution to amend its name after amending the bye-laws, the Government, after careful consideration, accorded permission to the Association represented by the fourth respondent to be recognized as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association and the Registrar also communicated to the petitioners society to remove the name “Andhra Pradesh” from the name of its society. It is an undisputed fact that no identical Association can be registered subsequently when there is an Association in existence. The record discloses that the Association represented by the fourth respondent was recognized and communications were sent to the said Association on behalf of the Government and they were representatives of the Society or attending to various duties and deliberations as representatives of the Non Gazetted Officers employees through the Association. 14. The petitioners at the time of making the application did not bring to the notice of the Government that there was a registered Association with identical name and they are registered with the second respondent. They simply stated that the Non Gazetted Officers wanted to register the society, therefore, they requested the Government to register the society as Andhra Pradesh Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association. Being mislead by the petitioners, the Government have passed the order according permission to register the society of the petitioners as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association. But subsequently, the fraud played by the petitioners came to light through the representation of the fourth respondent and after considering the totality of the circumstances, the Government recalled the order of permission accorded to the petitioners society for registration of the society and the Registrar also directed the petitioners society to delete the words “Andhra Pradesh” from the name of its Association. Though there is a bar to register similar association, the petitioners obtained permission by suppressing the fact that there is another Association with the similar name recognized by the Government. The intention of the petitioners to run parallel society due to differences between them cannot be encouraged as it creates lot of confusion among the people and the departments also in making correspondence and communicating the orders etc. 15. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Government has no power to recall the permission granted by it to the petitioners society and there is no power to anybody to cancel the registration. But after going through the record, it is noticed that by suppressing the fact that there is a similar society in existence, the petitioners played fraud on the Government and obtained the permission for registration of the Society. After coming to know about the fraud played by the petitioner and after verification of the record, the Government has decided to withdraw the permission accorded for registration of the society and accordingly, the orders were issued. The Registrar instead of canceling the registration directed the petitioners society to change their name by deleting the words “Andhra Pradesh”, therefore, in my considered view, under the above set of circumstances, the Government as well as the Registrar under the Act have every power to pass appropriate orders in the interest of the public and in the light of the suppression of the fact that there was identical society registered previously. 16. In the light of the above circumstances, I do not find any illegality or lack of authority to respondents 1 to 3 in passing the impugned orders and I do not find any grounds to set aside the same. 17. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. C.R.P.No.3511 of 2007 18. This Revision Petition has been filed by the first respondent in PSR O.P.No.1390 of 2004 on the file of the XII Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad. 19. The respondents 1 and 2 are the petitioners in the said O.P. The O.P. was filed under Section 23 of the Act for declaration that the first petitioner alone is entitled to use the name “Andhra Pradesh Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association” and the respondents are not entitled to use the name or associate with the name and all the communications, circulars, press notes etc. issued by the first respondent are illegal and consequently, grant injunction against respondents 1 and 2 from using the name of the A.P. Commercial Taxes N.G.Os Association and holding the General Body in the name of the said Association on 11- 06-2004. 20. The issued involved in this Revision Petition is similar to the issue involved in the above writ petition. 21. The Revision petitioner contended that the Non Gazetted Officers Association of the Commercial Taxes Department proposed to register a society under the Societies Registration Act and they got it registered as A.P. Commercial Taxes Non Gazetted Officers Association after obtaining permission from the Government through the proceedings, dated 31-01-2004. The Revision Petitioner, who is the first respondent in the O.P., pleaded that there was Commercial Taxes Department Employees Guild formed long ago and it was recognized by the Government in the year 1968 vide G.O.Ms.No.386, G.A. (SW) Department, dated 18-06-1968. The said guild consists of Gazetted Officers, Non Gazetted Officers and class-IV employees. Subsequently, the Gazetted Officers and