IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 23-09-2005 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KANNADASAN WRIT APPEAL NO.1078 OF 2003 and W.P.No.11415, 17299, 17341,14950, 14951, 17055 of 2003 & 24183 of 2004 and WAMP.Nos.193 and 3127 of 2005, WPMP.No.29358 of 2004 & WVMP.No.229 of 2005 W.A.No.1078 of 2003 The Music Academy, Rep. by its Executive Trustee No.168, TTK Road, Chennai 600 014. .. Appellant Vs. 1. Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600 028. 2. District Registrar of Audit and Enquiry Officer, Chennai Central, Chennai 600 001. 3. R. Parthasarathy, No.14, Madley Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017. .. Respondents W.P.No.11415 of 2003 Nalli N. Kuppuswami Chetti No.9, Nageswaran Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. .. Petitioner Vs. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1. Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Santhome, Chennai 600 004. 2. District Registrar of Societies (Central), No.20, Seethamma Road, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. 3. The Music Academy, No.168 (Old No.306), TTK Road, Chennai 600 014. .. Respondents W.P.No.17299 of 2003 Nalli N. Kuppuswami Chetti No.9, Nageswaran Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. .. Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 9. 2. Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Santhome, Chennai 600 004. 3. District Registrar of Societies (Central), No.20, Seethamma Road, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. 4. The Music Academy, No.168 (Old No.306), TTK Road, Chennai 600 014. .. Respondents https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.No.17341 of 2003 R. Parthasarathy, Old No.14/New No.68, Madley Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. .. Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 9. 2. Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600 028. 3. District Registrar of Societies Chennai(Central), No.20, Seethamma Road, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. 4. The Music Academy, No.168, TTK Road, Chennai 600 014. 5. Mrs. Lakshmi Viswanathan 6. Dr. Mano Bakthavatchalam 7. Mrs. Malathi Rangaswamy 8. M.S. Pattabiraman 9. N. Ramji 10. Dr.V.V. Srivatsa 11. M.S. Venkataraman 12. K.V. Balasubramanian 13. Kala Ramesh Rao 14. N. Kannan 15. L.G. Narayanaswamy 16. D.R. Santhanam 17. S. Swaminathan 18. Uma Mahesh 19. P. Vasanth Kumar 20. S.V. Ramaswamy .. Respondents https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.No.14950 of 2003 The Music Academy, Rep. by the Executive Trustee, No.168, TTK Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014. .. Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 9. 2. Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600 028. 3. R. Parthasarathy, Old No.14/new No.68, Madley Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. 4. Nalli N. Kuppuswami Chetti No.9, Nageswaran Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Respondents 3 & 4 are impleaded as per order dt. 1.9.2003 in WPMP.Nos.22652 to 22654/03 and 25149 & 25150 /2003 .. Respondents W.P.No.14951 of 2003 M.S. Pattabiraman .. Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 9. 2. Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600 028. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. R. Parthasarathy, Old No.14/New No.68, Madley Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Respondent No.3 is impleaded as per order dt. 1.9.2003 in WPMP.Nos.22652 to 22654/03 .. Respondents W.P.No.17055 of 2003 1. V.V. Srivatsa 2. Mano Bakthavatsalam 3. Mrs. Malathi Rangaswami 4. Mrs. Kala Ramesh Rao 5. P. Vasanth Kumar 6. Smt. Uma Mahesh 7. D.R. Santhanam 8. K.V. Balasubramaniyam 9. Mrs. Lakshmi Viswanathan .. Petitioners Vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 9. 2. Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600 028. 3. R. Parthasarathy, Old No.14/new No.68, Madley Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. 4. Nalli N. Kuppuswami Chetti No.9, Nageswaran Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Respondents 3 & 4 are impleaded as per order dt. 1.9.2003 in WPMP.No.29524/03 and 25149/2003 .. Respondents https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.No.24183 of 2004 The Music Academy, No.168 (Old No.306), TTK Road, Chennai 600 014. .. Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 9. 2. Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Santhome, Chennai 600 004. 3. District Registrar of Societies (Central), No.20, Seethamma Road, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. 4. R. Parthasarathy, Old No.14/new No.68, Madley Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. 5. Nalli N. Kuppuswami Chetti No.9, Nageswaran Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Respondents 4 & 5 impleaded as per order dt.3.1.2005 in WPMP. Nos.35019 & 35708 of 2004 .. Respondents Writ Appeal No.1078 of 2003 is filed under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 24.1.2003 passed by a learned single Judge in W.P.No.15900 of 2002. W.P.No.11415 of 2003 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Mandamus directing 1st and 2nd respondents to take up appropriate action in accordance with the provisions of the Tamilnadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 pursuant to the letter of the 1st respondent dated 19.3.2002 in No.51458/II/2001-01 and reports of the 2nd respondent dated 14.1.2003 in Nos.12850/E.1/2002 and 1285/E.1/2002. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.No.17299 of 2003 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Mandamus directing 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents to forbear the 4th respondent from convening the Annual General Meeting of the Music Academy, Madras on 29th June, 2003 or any other day or convening/holding any other meetings of the executive committee until the assumption of office of a validly constituted committee in terms of Section 15 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. W.P.No.17341 of 2003 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 2 and 3 to take appropriate action against the respondents 5 to 20 who are acting in violation of the provsions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act,1975 and the Rules framed thereunder, and consequently to forbear the respondents 5 to 20 and persons claiming powers under the respondents 5 to 20 from, in any way, meddling with the affairs of the 4th respondent Society, calling themselves as Office- Bearers, either by convening and conducting any Executive Committee meeting or Annual General Meeting of the 4th respondent, either on 29.6.2003 or on any other date. W.P.No.14950 of 2003 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent ending with the Show-Cause Notice No.17324/M/2002-10 dt.08-05-2003 and quash the same and further directing the respondent not to interfere with the working of the petitioner. W.P.No.14951 of 2003 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent culminating in the Show-Cause Notice No.17324/M/2002-10 dt.08-05-2003 and quash the same and further directing the respondents not to interfere with the working of the Music Academy. W.P.No.17055 of 2003 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent culminating in the Show-Cause Notice No.17324/M/2002-10 dt.08-05-2003 and quash the same and by directing the respondents not to interfere with the working of the Music Academy. W.P.No.24183 of 2004 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the third respondent culminating in the order No.7836/E.1/2004 dated 24.6.2004, quash the same. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Appellant : Mr.L. Sriram Panchu in WA.1078/03 Senior Advocate for Mr.T. Mohan For Respondents 1-2 : Mr.R. Muthukumarasamy Addl. Advocate General Assisted by Mr.R. Lakshminarayanan, Govt. Advocate For Respondent-3 : Mr.T.V. Ramanujam Senior Advocate for Mr.T.V. Krishnamachari For Petitioner : Mr.T.R. Mani in WP.11415/03 Senior Advocate for Mr.T.M. Hari Haran For Respondents 1-2 : Mr.R. Muthukumarasamy Addl. Advocate General Assisted by Mr.R. Lakshminarayanan, Govt. Advocate Respondent-3 : Mr.L. Sriram Panchu Senior Advocate for Mr.T. Mohan For Petitioner : Mr.K. Chandru in WP.17299/03 Senior Advocate for Mr.R. Yashod Vardhan For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.R. Muthukumarasamy Addl. Advocate General Assisted by Mr.R. Lakshminarayanan, Govt. Advocate Respondent-4 : Mr.T.R.Rajagopalan, Sr Advocate for Mr.T.M. Pappiah For Petitioner : Mr.T.V. Ramanujam in W.P.17341/03 Senior Advocate for Mr.T.V. Krishnamachari For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.R. Muthukumarasamy Addl. Advocate General Assisted by Mr.R. Lakshminarayanan, Govt. Advocate Respondent-4 : Mr.L. Sriram Panchu Senior Advocate for Mr.T. Mohan https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Respondents 6,7,10 to 13, 15, 16, 18 to 20 : Mrs. Rita Chandrasekar for M/s Aiyar & Dolia Respondents 5,8,9 and 14: No Appearance For Petitioner : Mr.T.R. Rajagopalan in W.P.14950/03 Senior Advocate for Mr.T.M. Pappiah For Respondents 1& 2 : Mr.R. Muthukumarasamy Addl. Advocate General Assisted by Mr.R. Lakshminarayanan, Govt. Advocate Respondent-3 : Mr.T.V. Ramanujam Senior Advocate for Mr.T.V. Krishnamachari Respondent-4 : Mr.Aravind P. Dattar Senior Advocate for Mr.R. Yashod Vardhan For Petitioner : Mr.B. Harikrishnan in WP.14951/2003 For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.R. Muthukumarasamy Addl. Advocate General Assisted by Mr.R. Lakshminarayanan, Govt. Advocate Respondent-3 : Mr.T.V. Ramanujam Senior Advocate for Mr.T.V. Krishnamachari For Petitioner : Mrs. Rita Chandrasekar in WP.No.17055/03 for M/s. Aiyar & Dolia For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.R. Muthukumarasamy Addl. Advocate General Assisted by Mr.R. Lakshminarayanan, Govt. Advocate For Petitioner : Mr.T.R. Rajagopalan in WP.24183/2004 Senior Advocate for Mr.T. Mohan https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.R. Muthukumarasamy Addl. Advocate General Assisted by Mr.R. Lakshminarayanan, Govt. Advocate Respondent-4 : Mr.T.V. Ramanujam Senior Advocate for Mr.T.V. Krishnamachari Respondent-5 : Mr.Aravind P. Dattar Senior Advocate for Mr.J. Srinivasa Mohan - - - COMMON JUDGMENT P.K. MISRA, J The Music Academy, Madras, a famous Institute known as such in the rest of the country for its promotion of music and culture and more in news, presently within Tamil Nadu or may be Chennai, because of the legal squabbles, was registered as a Society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 on 21.8.1929, 75 years back. As per the Memorandum of Association and Rules and Regulations, which were registered on the said date, the Governing Body called the Executive Committee consisted of one President, two or more Vice Presidents, two Trustees, two Joint Secretaries, one Treasurer and ten other Members. The registered Rules and Regulations provided that the members of the Executive Committee are to be elected at the Annual General Body Meeting and they have to hold office until fresh office bearers are elected. In 1953, the amended bye-laws provided that the term of the office bearers would be three years. On 22.4.1978, the Tamil Nadu Registration Act (Act 27 of 1975), hereinafter referred to as “the State Act”, came into force. 2. Two aspects are hotly contested relating to interpretation of the provisions contained in such Act vis-a-vis the provisions contained in the bye-laws of the Music Academy, which shall be noticed in due course. 3. For convenience, the participants, in the "Musical Drama / Legal Battle" pertaining to Music Academy would be referred to by their names or designations. 4. It is claimed on behalf of the Music Academy that the new Memorandum of Association and bye-laws were adopted at the Extra- ordinary General Body Meeting of the Society held on 21.1.1979. The applicability/validity of such amended bye-laws are being called in question by some members and/or the office bearers or even the statutory https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ authorities. As per such bye-laws, there is a provision for appointment of Trustees by nomination for six years. There is a further provision that the President and four Secretaries would be Ex-officio trustees during their three years term. There is no dispute that the President and the four Secretaries are to be elected in the Annual General Body Meeting. One of the questions raised is the validity of the provision regarding appointment of Trustees by nomination and not by election and the other dispute relates to the term of such nominated trustees, which is said to be six years. The Board of Trustees, as per such provision, is required to appoint one of the Trustees as Executive Trustee, who would be in charge of the day-to-day affairs and would represent the Academy and all its proceedings. 5. Bye-laws 12 and 19 provide that the elected Managing Committee is to act subject to the powers vested in the Board of Trustees. This aspect is also in dispute as it is the contention of some of the members that the Managing Committee cannot efface itself by creating a superior authority over itself. The bye-laws as amended on 21.1.1979 have been filed with the Registrar on 7.2.1979. However, amended bye-laws have not been registered. It is, however, not in dispute that in spite of non-registration of such amended bye-laws, the affairs of the Music Academy were being managed in accordance with such provisions and the elections to various office bearers and nomination of trustees were taking place accordingly. 6. As per the resolution in Extra-ordinary General Body Meeting on 28.5.1989, clause 13(2) of the bye-law to the following effect "No member who has not completed 3 years membership, will be eligible to hold any position either by election or by co-option in the Executive Committee/Governing Body, was included. However, such amendment had not been registered with the Registrar. Subsequently, a letter has been addressed to the Registrar to condone the delay and to register the amendments. In Extra-ordinary General Body Meeting of the Music Academy on 31.10.1992, certain other amendments were adopted. By such amendments, Membership fee payable by the Patrons, Donors, Life- members and ordinary Members were purported to be increased. Such amendments were also never formally registered. However, there is no dispute that on the basis of such enhanced membership fee, many persons have been admitted to the Music Academy as patrons, donors, life members and ordinary members. It is stated that between 1993 and 1998, three notices dated 20.9.1993, 17.2.1997 and 22.5.1998 had been sent by the Additional Inspector General, the Sub-Registrar and the District Registrar respectively to the Music Academy, which remain unanswered. On 24.6.2001, at the General Body Meeting, elections were held and the persons who are presently in charge were elected as office bearers. The election dated 24.6.2001 was on the basis of the bye-laws purportedly amended in 1989 which made a nascent member ineligible for holding any post. At that stage, R. Parthasarathy, a life Member, the petitioner in W.P.No.17341 of 2003, had written two letters dated 28.8.2001 to the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ District Registrar seeking for certified copies of the bye-laws and the certified copy of Form-VII (list of office bearers), particularly, he wanted Memorandum of Bye-laws adopted by the Extra-ordinary General Body Meeting held on 21.1.1979, amendment to bye-law dated 28.5.1989 and amendment to bye-law dated 31.5.1992. Apparently at that stage it was discovered that amendments to the bye-laws had not been registered and pursuant to the query from the District Registrar, the Music Academy through its Secretary gave reply dated 5.11.2001, enclosing several documents, including Members List in Form VI and Form VII and upto date list of members as on 31.5.2001. In such letter, it was also prayed for condoning the delay in filing the documents and the Secretary further assured that the Academy would be prompt in filing the returns in future. Subsequently, the Music Academy on 11.1.2002 wrote a letter to the Inspector General of Registration requesting for condonation of delay in filing the annual returns for the years 1989 to 2001. 7. At that stage, C.S.No.487 of 2001 was filed by another member Mr.P. Venugopal against the Music Academy with an injunction petition numbered as O.A.No.556 of 2001 in Appln.No.2890 of 2001 in C.S.No.487 of 2001. Prayer in the suit was for a declaration that the Bye-laws 12(3), 19, 26, 35 and 36 were void being contrary to the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 and for a mandatory injunction directing the Music Academy to bring the bye-laws of the Society in consonance with the provisions of the Act, and for several other allied reliefs. 8. O.A.No.556 of 2001, an application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC., arising from such suit was dismissed by a learned single Judge by order dated 28.9.2001. O.S.A.Nos.316 & 317 of 2001 filed by such plaintiff were disposed of by the Division Bench with a request to the learned Judge to dispose of the Civil Suit, C.S.No.487 of 2001 itself on priority basis, untrammelled by the observations contained in the interim order, treating the same as purely tentative. It is not in dispute that subsequently such suit has been dismissed as withdrawn. 9. It appears that the Inspector General of Registration initiated some suo motu enquiry into the affairs of the Music Academy and at that stage many papers were submitted with request for condonation of delay. On 29.1.2002, the District Registrar, who had been called upon to inquire, wrote a letter to the Inspector General indicating about certain constitutional, financial and functional irregularities in the running of the Music Academy. In such report, inter alia, the following irregularities were pointed out :- (a) Amendment dated 28.5.1989 had not been registered; (b) The Music Academy had not filed with the Registrar of Societies any amendment said to have been made on 31.10.1992 and has been receiving the enhanced subscription for the past 9 years. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (c) The bye-laws filed on 7.2.1979 with the Registrar were in contravention of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act. (d) The Music Academy had not filed Form VI (Register of Members) as per Rule 16 and Form VII (Notice of Change among the Members of the Society) as per sub-rule (2) of Rule 17 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Rules, 1978. 10. Thereafter, on 27.2.2002, Form VI was submitted by the Music Academy. On 19.3.2002, the Inspector General of Registration wrote to the Secretary of the Music Academy, enclosing a copy of the enquiry report. It was indicated : “... In the report, various irregularities including non- filing of returns, inconsistency of bye-laws to the provisions of the Act, enforcement of amended bye-laws without getting it registered with District Registrar, financial mismanagement and about the activities of the board of Trustees have been pointed out. Hence, as provided under sub section 9of section 36 of the Act, I hereby request you to set right lapses mentioned in the report within two months from the date of receipt of this letter.” 11. W.P.No.15900 of 2002 was filed by the Music Academy for quashing the enquiry report and the notice dated 19.3.2002, under which such enquiry report dated 29.1.2002 had been enclosed. Such writ petition was dismissed by the learned single Judge by order dated 24.1.2003, which has given rise to the present Writ Appeal No.1078 of 2003. 12. It appears that in the meantime P. Venugopal and R.Parthasarathy had filed W.P.Nos.20777 and 20778 of 2002. In W.P.No.20777 of 2002, the prayer was to forbear the District Registrar from in any way recording the change in the members of the Executive Committee of the Music Academy said to have taken place on 24.6.2001, filed in Form No.VII of the Rules framed under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. Such writ petition was disposed of on 18.9.2002 directing the District Registrar of Societies to consider the matter without expressing any opinion on the validity of the election. 13. In W.P.No.20778 of 2002, the prayer was for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus or direction to forbear the District Registrar from taking on record any register of members filed by the Music Academy, under Sections 14 & 15 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 read with the Rules framed thereunder without verifying whether the register of members of the Music Academy has been finalised by properly classifying its members in accordance with the legally existing bye-law of the third respondent. Without expressing any opinion the questions raised, the learned single Judge disposed of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ writ petition by directing the District Registrar to consider the matter after giving notice. 14. On 14.1.2003, the District Registrar, on the basis of the direction issued by the High Court dated 18.9.2002, observed that amendment to bye-laws had not been submitted within the stipulated period as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act, and therefore observed:- “... bringing into effect an unregistered Bye-law is contrary to Section 12(3) and therefore the Form VII filed seeking to register the change among the members of the Executive Committee elected on 24.6.2001 cannot be taken on file. Further, it is hereby informed that the society alone is responsible for the consequences arising out of this return.” Such order of the District Registrar has not been specifically challenged. However, N. Kuppuswami Chetti has filed W.P.No.11415 of 2003 seeking for writ of mandamus directing the Inspector General of Registration and the District Registrar to take appropriate action against the Music Academy pursuant to the letter dated 19.3.2002 and report of enquiry dated 14.1.2003. 15. On 13.2.2003, the President of the Music Academy wrote to the District Registrar that filing of revised Form-VII was not required and there was no provision authorising the District Registrar to return the Form even if filed beyond the stipulated period as such filing was only for intimation. However, subsequently, on 1.4.2003, the Music Academy filed an application for exemption under Section 54 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, explaining various circumstances and seeking for condonation of delay in filing the annual accounts and Form- VII and also the delay in registering the amendments passed in the General Body Meetings dated 28.5.1989 and 31.10.1992 and also seeking exemption in respect of other provisions of the Act. It is stated that such application has been returned vide letter dated 13.11.2003 to the Music Academy on the footing that the writ appeal and other connected writ petitions are pending before the High Court and, therefore, the application cannot be considered. 16. Subsequently, on 8.5.2003, the Government issued show cause notice under Section 34-A for supersession of the Committee and appointment of Special Officer. Such show cause notice has been challenged by the Music Academy in W.P.No.14950 of 2003 and some other members of the Executive Committee in W.P.Nos.14951 & 17055 of 2003. In the said writ petitions, while entertaining the matters, the High Court has observed that it would be open to the Music Academy to submit reply to the show cause without prejudice to the contentions raised in the writ petitions and it is stated that the Music Academy had furnished certain particulars explaining various allegations. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 17. While the matter stood thus, the Music Academy had convened an Annual General Body Meeting but, at that stage, N.Kuppusami Chetti, filed W.P.No.17299 of 2003 praying for writ of Mandamus directing the State Government, Inspector General of Registration and the District Registrar to forbear the Music Academy from convening the Annual General Body Meeting until assumption of a validly constituted Committee in terms of section 15 of the Act. 18. W.P.No.17341 of 2003 has been filed by R.Parthasarathy for similar relief against the Music Academy as well as the office bearers to forbear them from meddling with the affairs of the Society. In these two writ petitions, an interim order of injunction dated 25.6.2003 was passed restraining the Executive Committee members from convening Annual General Body Meeting on 29.6.2003 or any other date. On 4.9.2003, however, a further order in W.P.No.17055 of 2003 and in other connected writ petition was passed permitting the Executive Committee to act till 3.2.2004 to conduct music festival during the year 2003, subject to certain conditions. 19. The petitioner R. Parthasarathy had also filed W.P.No.15079 of 2004 as his representation to the Registrar was not disposed of and such matter was disposed of by one of us (P.K. Misra, J) on 2.6.2004 directing the Registrar to dispose of the representation dated