IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 26-10-2009 Coram The Honourable Mr.Justice F.M.IBRAHIM KALIFULLA and The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM W.A.Nos.212 & 213 of 2000 C.M.P.No.1870 of 2000 Indra Kumar Poddar ... Appellant in both writ appeals Vs. 1. Union of India, rep.by its Secretary, Department of Education, Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 001. 2. The Custodian, Auroville Foundation, Bharat Nivas, Auroville (PO), Auroville – 605 101. 3. The Auroville Foundation, rep.by its Chairman, Auroville Foundation, Bharat Nivas, Auroville (PO), Auroville – 605 101. ...Respondents in both writ appeals W.A.No.212 of 2000 is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order of the learned single Judge dated 17.2.1999 made in W.P.No.12274 of 1991. W.A.No.213 of 2000 is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order o the learned single Judge dated 17.2.1999 made in WMP No.2935 of 1994 in W.P.No.12274 of 1991. This Petitioner presented to this court under article 226 of constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarifiled Mandamus calling for the records of the first Respondent in office order dated 25.2.1983 passed by the administrator of Auroville, the order of the first respondent in D.O.No.F.27/88-89 UU dated 8.9.1989 and order No.F.27-14/90-UU dated 23.4.1991 quash the same and direct the respondents to restore the food and other allowances to the petitioner and his two sons as a member of Auroville with restrospective effect from 1.3.1983 with arrears and to further direct the respondents to treat the petitioner as a resident of Auroville. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Appellant : Mr.Vijay Narayan, Senior Counsel for Mr.R.Parthiban For 1st Respondent : Mr.Haja Mohideen Gisthi, ACGSC For Respondents 2 & 3 : Mrs.Radha Gopalan COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.) The above writ appeals have been filed against the order made in W.P.No.12274 of 1991 and W.M.P.No. 2935 of 1994 in W.P.No.12274 of 1991 respectively. 2. The facts leading to filing of the writ petition are as stated hereunder: (a) The appellant and their grand parents have been devotees of "Sri Aurabindo" and "The Mother" for quite a long time and it is stated that they have renounced all their worldly possessions in favour of the Ashram and have dedicated their life for the services of "Sri Arabindo" and "The Mother". Finally in the year 1953, they decided to renounce the worldly life and joined the Ashram at Pondicherry. "The Mother" admitted the appellant's grandfather, his parents, his uncle, their families, appellant's four brothers and the appellant, as permanent members of the Ashram sometime during October/November, 1953. At that time, the appellant was nine years of age. (b) According the appellant, one of the rule for admission into the Ashram was, when once a devotee was admitted to the Ashram, he was not supposed to own any personal property, but to offer all the wealth that he possessed at the time of admission, to the lotus feet of Sri Aurobindo and The Mother and then the Ashram took upon itself the burden of maintaining him, meeting all his bare minimum needs that are absolutely necessary for a healthy spiritual life. In the case of the appellant, his parents surrendered all their wealth and it became the responsibility of the Ashram to look after and maintain the entire family, including the appellant. (c) During 1960, a Society under the name and style of 'Sri Aurobindo Society' was formed for the purpose of disseminating the ideals and teachings of Sri Aurobindo and The Mother, in and outside India. This society was originally registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and subsequently registered under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961. In terms of Clause 7 of the Memorandum of Association, The Mother shall be the permanent President of the Sri Aurobindo Society, and that she remained President of the Society throughout her life time. It is stated that The Mother left her body on 17th November, 1973. (d) Pursuant to the objects and ideas of establishing a spiritualised Society, in a conference held during August, 1964, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ "The Mother" gave the name "Auroville" to a project of the Society. In the year 1965, the Society made a public announcement that they are setting up an Universal and Cultural Township about four miles from the Ashram, named Auroville, which means 'The city of dawn'. (e) The appellant stated that he completed his education in the Sri Aurobindo International Centre for Education in the year 1963 and was doing work in the Ashram Department. After public announcement of the project Auroville, "The Mother" herself entrusted to the appellant in March, 1965, the responsibility of acquiring lands for the Auroville project and from 6.4.1965 onwards the appellant was purchasing lands for the project. Since the appellant was permitted to get married, it is stated that "The Mother" had permitted him to have the residence in the Promessee settlement of the Auroville, in which the appellant and his wife continued to stay. It is further stated that from April, 1965 to March, 1971, the appellant had acquired about 1600 acres of the land for the project. (f) In or about November, 1975, there arose certain dispute regarding the management of the project as well as the Society and a group of dissident members were trying to interfere with the original plans of "The Mother", which were envisaged and therefore a suit came to be filed by certain group of persons in O.S.No.60 of 1976 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Pondicherry, which was subsequently transferred to the Additional Sub Court, Pondicherry. It is stated that there was an order of interim injunction. which came to be contested by the dissident group of members. (g) At that stage, on 18.11.1980, the Government of India issued an ordinance known as Auroville (Emergency Provisions) Ordinance, 1980, by which the Government took over the management of the Auroville for a temporary period. This ordinance was replaced by The Auroville (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1980 (Act 59 of 1980). The validity of the Act 59 of 1980 came to be challenged by Sri Aurobindo Society and few others before the Honourable Supreme Court. It is stated that the appellant herein was one of the person, who was actively involved in such litigation and instructing the learned Counsels appearing before the Honourable Supreme Court. The Honourable Supreme Court by judgment dated 8.11.1982, upheld the validity of the Act. (h) In terms of Section 5 of Act 59 of 1980, the Central Government had the powers to appoint an Administrator for the purpose of taking over the management of Auroville and the Administrator was to carry on the management of the Auroville for and on behalf of the Central Government. After the judgment was delivered by the Honourable Supreme Court on 8.11.1982, on the same day two orders were issued and by Order No.1 dated 8.11.1982, the Administrator divested the appellant of his responsibilities and work in relation to the land and estate management, and by Order No.11 dated 8.11.1982, the responsibility for maintenance and development of Promesse settlement was also taken away from the appellant and was handed over to another member of the Auroville. It is to be noted that these orders divesting the appellant of the powers were not questioned by the appellant. (i) Subsequently, by office note dated 25.2.1983, the Administrator of the Auroville decided to stop the payment of food https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and other allowances to the appellant and his family members with effect from 1.3.1983. According to the appellant, this order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and it was not communicated to the appellant, but to the Society alone. Therefore the appellant had submitted a representation on 21.5.1987 followed by further representations on 23.5.1987 and 24.6.1987. (j) In the order dated 25.2.1983, which is also one of the orders impugned in the writ petition, it was stated that, "it is felt that Shri Indra Poddar is in a position to maintain himself and his family and so having regard to the dwindling position of funds, further payment of the said allowances to him is stopped." The appellant objected to such proceeding and had submitted various representations in the nature of appeal. While considering such representations, an order came to be passed on 29.5.1989 by the Department of Education, Ministry of Human Resources Development, by which it was stated that it is understood that the appellant was gainfully employed in an establishment during 1983-1989 and as per the rules of Auroville Council, he ceased to be an Aurovillian. The appellant was further informed that he is not entitled for restoration of his food and other allowances and he may however apply to the Auroville Council for readmission in the Auroville. (k) Thereafter, the appellant had submitted further appeal on 22.6.1989. On receipt of the said appeal, the very same officer, who passed the original order dated 29.5.1989, took up the appeal petition and by order dated 8.9.1989 stated that it is the Auroville Council, which decides the question of admission, integration and readmission to the Auroville and advised the appellant to approach the Auroville Council for readmission to the Auroville. It was further informed that the food and other allowances are no longer paid by the staff in the Auroville, but by the persons in charge of the units with which the Aurovillian concerned may be working. (l) The appellant has subsequently made several representations and ultimately by order dated 23.4.1991, the appellant was informed that according to Article 19 of the Auroville Foundation Act, 1988, the Governing Body of the Foundation is to be guided by the advice of the Residents' Assembly of the Auroville and therefore the appellant was advised to take up his case with the Working Committee of the Residents' Assembly, which was to be constituted soon. 3. At this juncture, it is relevant to point out that Act 59 of 1980 came to be replaced by the Auroville Foundation Act, 1988 (Central Act 54 of 1988). The powers under the Act 59 of 1980 was restricted to taking over of the management of Sri Aurobindo Society, and Act 54 of 1988 was for taking over of the ownership and control of the Society. 4. The appellant has filed the writ petition challenging the order dated 25.2.1983, by which his food and other allowances for himself and his family members was stopped and the subsequent order dated 29.5.1989, by which the appellant was informed that he ceased to be an Aurovillian as he was gainfully employed and the subsequent orders passed on the representations made by him on 8.9.1989 and 23.4.1991. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5. The writ petition was resisted by both the Central Government as well as by the Auroville Foundation and this Court by order dated 17.2.1999 dismissed the writ petition against which W.A.No.212 of 2000 is filed. 6. When the writ petition was pending, the appellant had also filed W.M.P.No.2935 of 1994 for raising additional grounds. Since the writ petition was dismissed, the miscellaneous petition was also dismissed by order dated 17.2.1999, against which W.A.No.213 of 2000 is filed. 7. It is seen that the appellant filed review application in R.A.No.59 of 1999 seeking review of the order made in the writ petition and the same was also dismissed by order dated 14.6.1999. 8. Mr.Vijay Narayan, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the appellant would assail the correctness of the order passed in the writ petition and miscellaneous petition on the following grounds: (i) The impugned order dated 25.2.1983 has been passed without any notice to the appellant and the same is in violation of the principles of natural justice and it violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. (ii) The right, which has accrued in favour of the appellant for over 30 years has been snatched away without affording even an opportunity to the appellant. (iii) In the impugned order, a reference has been made as 'it is felt'. However, there is no material in respect of such decision and such an order is wholly arbitrary and unreasonable. (iv) The impugned order is discriminatory and amounts to victimisation, since other persons have been given food allowance and the appellant alone has been singled out. (v) That the impugned order has been passed by the Administrator and in terms of the Act 59 of 1980, which was in force during the relevant point of time, the Administrator had no power to alter the privileges enjoyed by the appellant. (vi) Even under the Act 54 of 1988, there is no power vested with the Auroville Council for passing an order permitting a person from being an Aurovillian and the said power is conferred only with the Residents' Assembly. Therefore the impugned order is without jurisdiction. (vii) There is no written order determining the status of the appellant as Aurovillian in the manner known to law. (viii) Though the appeal was filed as against the order dated 29.5.1989, the same was rejected by the very same authority, who passed the order dated 29.5.1989 and as such it is illegal. (ix) The order rejecting W.P.M.P.No.2935 of 1994 filed for raising additional grounds is not tenable and in the affidavit filed in support of the miscellaneous petition it has been specifically brought out by the appellant that the reason assigned for stopping the food allowance is not the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ real reason and there are certain ulterior motive behind such an order. It is pointed out in the affidavit that the real motive for the expulsion of the appellant is revealed in the last but one paragraphs of the letter of the Working Committee dated 23.9.1993, which states that during summer of 1989, the first official Residents' Assembly met in Auroville and one of the topics was the problem created by a number of neutrals residing in Auroville, whose relationship with the Residents' Assembly was as yet unclear. The decision of the Residents' Assembly was to accept as members of the Residents' Assembly all of them with the exception of the appellant and three others, on the ground that the individuals have actively involved in activities deemed detrimental to the Committee of the Auroville. Further, the learned counsel by relying upon the other averments contained in the affidavit, more particularly paragraphs 7 and 8 would state that the reason assigned in the impugned order is not the actual reason and it is on account of certain other reasons which are clear from the minutes of the meeting of the Working Committee. (x) That, as the impugned order is punitive in nature, it is all the more necessary that opportunity ought to have been afforded to the appellant. (xi) Finally the learned Senior Counsel would submit that in the absence of any valid order terminating or removing the appellant from his status as Aurovillian, it is deemed that he continues to be an Aurovillian and there is no justification for the respondents to stop his food and other allowances. 9. Mr.Haja Mohideen Gisthi, learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent would contend that the writ petition itself was liable to be dismissed on the ground of inordinate delay and laches as the writ petition was filed after the period of eight years from the date of the order dated 25.2.1983. The other orders dated 29.5.1989, 8.9.1989 and 23.4.1991 cannot be construed as impugned orders since they were replies given to the representations made by the appellant. Learned counsel further submitted that there is no mandatory obligation on the part of the respondents to supply food and other allowances to the appellant and in the absence of any such statutory obligation, there is no error in the order dated 25.2.1983. It is further contended that by the order dated 23.4.1991, the appellant had been advised to take up his case with the Working Committee of the Residents' Assembly, which was to be constituted soon, for his readmission. Finally the learned counsel submitted that the order passed in the writ petition does not call for any interference and that no appeal has been filed against the order rejecting the review application in R.A.No.59 of 1999, dated 14.6.1999. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10. We have carefully considered the submissions of either side and perused the materials on record. 11. Though the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant had taken us extensively through the factual aspects of the matter, the issue involved in the present appeals lies in a narrow campus, in the sense, it involves the interpretation of two statutes, by which Sri Aurobindo Society came under the control of the Union of India and as to whether the impugned orders have been passed in accordance with the said statutes and whether there is any violation of the principles of natural justice and has there been any arbitrariness in the decision violative of Article 14 and infringement of rights enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 12. Act 59 of 1980 came to be passed to provide for the taking over, in the public interest, of the management of Auroville for a limited period and for matters connected therewith. Under Section 3 of the said Act, on and from the appointed day, for a period of two years thereafter, the management of Auroville shall vest in the Central Government, provided that where the Central Government is of the opinion that in order to secure the proper management of Auroville, it is expedient that such management should continue to vest in that Government after the expiry of the said period of two years, it may, from time to time, issue directions for the continuance of such management. Under sub- section (2) of Section 3, Auroville shall be deemed to include all the assets, rights, etc., including funds of the Society. Under section 5 of the Act, there was power to appoint an Administrator and in terms of sub-Section (1) of Section 5, Central Government shall appoint a person or a body of persons for administration for the purpose of taking over the administration of the Auroville, which carry on the management of the Auroville for and on behalf of the Central Government. In terms of sub-section (5) of section 5, the Administrator shall be entitled, notwithstanding anything contained in the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961, exercise in relation to Auroville, the powers of the Governing Body or Executive Committee, as the case may be, of the Board of Trustees of the Society, including the powers to dispose of any property or assets of the Society, whether such powers are derived from the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961 or from the memorandum and rules and regulations of the Society or from any other source. Under Section 6, the Advisory Council was constituted. In terms of Section 15, penalties which could be imposed on any person were also listed out. By virtue of Section 18, Auroville (Emergency Provisions) Ordinance, 1980, stood repealed. 13. After the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Act, the Administrator appointed by the order dated 8.11.1982, in exercise of his powers conferred under sub-section (5) of Section 5 of the Act, directed that the appellant shall hand over all the records and papers and properties pertaining to land and estate management in his possession to two named persons. It was further https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ordered that the appellant shall henceforth has nothing to do with the land and estate management. By another order No.11 dated 8.11.1982, the appellant's wife, who had been managing the building, etc., of the Promessee on behalf of her husband, was also directed to hand over immediately the same to the named person, all papers and accounts maintained by her in connection with the said charge. It is submitted that the appellant and his wife carried out the directions in the orders dated 8.11.1982. 14. It is seen on 2.12.1982, the Deputy Administrator of the Auroville had addressed the Administrator stating that he forwarded certain details which had been called for, one of which, is the list of Aurovillians entitled to food and other allowances, in which the name of the appellant finds place in Sl.No.1 and by virtue of which, two adults namely the appellant and his wife and their two children were entitled to food allowance of Rs.400/- and Education allowance of Rs.66.66 and prosperity being 10% of the food allowance, in all Rs.506.66. It is thereafter the impugned order dated 25.2.1983 came to be passed. The said order deals with payment of food and other allowances to three persons named in the order. The appellant's name finds place in Sl.No.2 and the said order reads thus, "It is felt that Shri Indra Poddar is in a position to maintain himself and his family and so having regard to the dwindling position of funds, further payment of the said allowances to him is stopped." Therefore it is to be noted that the reasons which has weighed in the minds of the Administrator as could be seen from the order is that it was felt that the appellant was in a position to maintain himself and his family and having regard to the dwindling position of funds of the Society further payment of the allowance was stopped. 15. It is contended by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant that no notice was issued prior to such order being passed. In fact the appellant had taken up an employment in a private establishment only on 1.3.1983 and this is because the food allowance had been stopped on 25.2.1983 and he had to seek employment to sustain himself and his family. Therefore, the learned Senior counsel contended that the reason assigned is incorrect. That apart, it is to be noted that in the affidavit filed in support of the application for raising additional grounds, certain factual details have been placed which would go to show that the reason assigned in the impugned orders dated 29.5.1989 and 8.9.1989 are not the real reason but on account of the opinion expressed by certain members of the Residents' Assembly, which met during summer, 1989. However, the appellant has not been given any notice prior to such an order being passed. The appellant on receipt of the said order did not immediately rush to this Court, but had submitted representations and appeals seeking review of the said order. 16. While the appeals were pending, Act 54 of 1988 came to be enacted, which Act was to provide for the acquisition and transfer https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of the undertakings of Auroville and to vest such undertakings in a Foundation established for the purpose with a view to making long term arrangements for the better management and further development of the Auroville. In terms of Section 3 of the Act 54 of 1988, on and from the appointed day the undertaking of the Society, trust and body as form part of, or are relatable to Auroville and the right, title and interest of the Society, stood transferred and vested in the Central Government. Section 4 provides for general effect of vesting. Section 6 empowered the Central Government to direct vesting of the undertakings in the Foundation. Section 7 of the Act provides for the management of the undertaking. Section 10 deals with establishment and incorporation of the Foundation viz., The Auroville Foundation. In terms of sub-section (1) of section 10 with effect from such date as the Central Government may, by notification, appoint in this behalf, there shall be established a Foundation to be called the Auroville Foundation. In terms of sub-section (2) the Foundation shall be a body corporate and in terms of sub-section (3) the Foundation shall consists of three authorities, viz., (a) The Governing Board; (b) The Resident Assembly; (c) The Auroville International Advisory Council. The persons, who shall constitute the Governing Board is in terms of Section 11 of the Act. Section 12 deals with the term of office of the