APHC010294502021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3525] TUESDAY ,THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 631/2021 Between: The Convention Of Baptist Churches ...APPELLANT AND The Convention Baptist Churches and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant: 1. AKA VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS (AP) 2. C SUBODH The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 631/2021 AND WRIT PETITION NOS: 4080/2016, 10522/2016, 21005/2020 AND 8254/2021 The Court made the following common Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao) As all these cases arise out of the functioning of the executive committee of Convention of Baptist Churches of Northern Circars, they are being disposed of by way of this common order. In all these cases, the issue that has been raised is the role of function of the Registrar of Societies, under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act 2001. 2. The convention of Baptist Churches of Nothern Circars was earlier registered as a Society under the Societies Registration Act 1860 (herein after referred to ‘the Act’). This Act now stands superseded by the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001, insofar as the society is concerned. Section 9 of the A.P.Societies Registration Act 2001 reads as follows: 9. Filling of annual list – Every year the society shall within fifteen days from the date on which the General Body Meeting was held furnish a list to the Registrar of Societies which shall contain the names and addresses of the members of the Managing Committee and Officers entrusted with the management of the affairs of the Society. 3 3. Every Executive Committee or office bearers of a society, registered under this Act, are required under Section 9 of the Act, to file a list of the members of the Managing Committee and Officers entrusted with the management of the Society. It appears that such a list was filed in the year 1990, under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Thereafter, no list has been filed. The petitioners in W.P.No.8254 of 2021 contend that they had filed such list for each of the five year periods commencing from 1990-1995. We do not propose to go into this issue. 4. It appears that various persons, claiming to have been elected to the Governing Body and to the offices of management of the Society had been filing lists, as required under Section 9 of the Act. However, the Registrar has not been taking these lists on record. Aggrieved by the action of the Registrar, the persons enumerated under such lists have approached this Court by way of writ petitions. Some of these writ petitions are now before us. It also appears that one set of persons had approached this Court by way of W.P.No.15028 of 2020 which came to be allowed, by an order dated 19.01.2021, directing the Registrar to receive the list and process the same. A third party to the writ petition, filed the W.A.No.631 of 2021, contending that no direction can be issued to the registrar to record the names despite the pendency of disputes. 4 5. There is no representation for the petitioners in W.P.Nos.4080 of 2016 and 10522 of 2016. The learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.21005 of 2020 sought time. We have rejected the said request as the cases were posted for dismissal. 6. In the absence of these learned counsels, the matters have been disposed of on the merits of the cases. 7. At the cost of repetition, the principal issue before this Court is whether the Registrar of Public Societies, can receive lists even when disputes between the members of the Society, as to the identity of the elected Governing Body are pending. Though, no specific disputes are placed before us, it is clear that there are disputes inasmuch as different sets of people are claiming to be elected members for different periods of time. For example, the petitioners in W.P.No.8254 of 2021 claim that they are the elected members of the governing body for the periods 1990-1995, 1995-2000, 2000-2005, 2005- 2010, 2010-2015, 2015-2020 and 2020-2025. The petitioners in W.P.No.15028 of 2020 claim that they are the elected members of the governing body for the period from 2018 to 2023. The term of the Governing Body of the Society, is admitted on all sides to be 5 years. In such circumstances, an overlap of 3 years between the two elected bodies clearly shows that there is a dispute. 5 8. On the question of how the Registrar is to consider such applications, a Division Bench of erstwhile High Court at Hyderabad for the States of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in Mokkapati Chandra Sekhar Rao and others vs. Pragathi Educational Society, Guntur District and others1 had held as follows: [11] The controversies between the parties before us are in respect of matters relating to the Society, including disputes arising among members touching the membership, constitution of management committee and the officers who are entrusted with the management and the affairs of the Society. Therefore, if there is any dispute as to the correctness of the list of members, which is to be furnished to the Registrar in terms of Section 9 of the Act, or if there is any dispute relating to the identity of the persons, who are the members of the managing committee and officers entrusted with the management of the affairs of the Society, all such disputes can be resolved only by recourse to Section 23 of the Act, which provides a duel mode for disputes resolution; that is to say, by taking recourse to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966 or by recourse to adjudication by the District Court under Section 23 of the Act itself. [12] In the aforesaid view of the legal provisions, these appeals are ordered directing that the Registrar shall not decide any dispute relating to the contents of the list furnished by either side, but will continue to keep on register; the list furnished to that Officer at the earlier point of time in terms of the directions issued by this Court i.e. the list furnished by the petitioner in WP.No.1191 of 2018; which list will also be subject to the finality of any proceedings which the parties may take recourse to under Section 23 of the Act, as may be advised. WP.No.16816 of 2018 is closed as unnecessary. 1 2019(1) ALD 196(DB) 6 9. We are in respectful agreement with the views expressed by the Division Bench. 10. Sri A.Venkata Ramana, learned counsel appearing in W.A.No.631 of 2021 would also draw the attention of this Court to the Interlocutory Order passed by this Court, in W.A.No.631 of 2021, on 07.09.2022. The same is reproduced herein in below: Post these cases on 14.09.2022 along with W.P.No.21005 of 2020. Meanwhile, the properties of the Convention of Baptist Churches of Northern Circars, Kakinada, East Godavari District, shall not be alienated or any third party rights shall not be created thereon by any of the groups or individual intending to have control over the properties of the Church. We have passed this interim order for the reason that different groups are trying to have control over the affairs and properties of the Church and are making allegations against each other and not allowing the list of governing body to be finalized, and at the same time, different groups are alienating the properties of the Church to the detriment of the community. We are alive to the situation that though saving the property of the Church is not the subject matter of the writ petition, in the larger interest of the community we have passed this interim order. 11. In view of the aforesaid narration, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of all these cases with the following directions: 7 1. The Registrar of Public Societies shall receive all lists submitted by the parties to these litigations. 2. These lists are to be submitted to the Registrar within two weeks from today. 3. At the expiry of the period of two weeks, the Registrar shall collate all the lists and verify whether there is any overlap in the periods claimed for each Governing Body. 4. The Registrar shall also verify whether more than one list has been filed in relation to any period. 5. In the event of any such overlap or dispute relating to the identity of the members of Governing Body for any period, the Registrar shall not decide the said dispute and shall leave it open to the parties to approach the appropriate forum for resolution of these disputes. 6. In the event of the Registrar being able to reconcile the lists, without going into any disputes, the same shall be taken on record. 7. If the Registrar is unable to reconcile these lists and he is required to leave it open to the parties to approach the appropriate forum, the Registrar shall keep all the lists submitted to him in the record. However, no copy of such lists will be released nor shall it be taken to as a certification of election of any of the members mentioned in that list. Though an interim direction for protecting the property of the 8 Society had been issued by this Court, it would not be possible for this Court to extend the same as any such extension would amount to an open ended extension effectively barring the Society from alienating its property for all times to come. 12. With the above observations, the Writ Appeal and the Writ Petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 13. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J _______________________ DR. K.MANMADHA RAO, J sj 9 126 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 631/2021 AND WRIT PETITION NOS: 4080/2016, 10522/2016, 21005/2020 AND 8254/2021 Date:01.04.2025 sj