1 2025:CGHC:52011 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1110 of 2016 * - Mulchand Patel S/o Late Prem Ram Patel, Aged About 54 Years R/o Purani Basti, Rani Para, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Commerce And Industries, Mahandi Bhawan Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Registrar, Firms And Societies Chhattisgarh, Indiravati Bhawan, Block 1, Third Floor, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Shri Ramchand Pandey Secretary, Gyam Bharti Aadarsh Shikshan Samiti, Janjgir, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 4 - Gyan Bharti Aadarsh Shikshan Samiti, Champa Road, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa, Registration No. 23155 Through Its Secretary Shri Ramchand Pandey, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : None appeared even in three rounds For Respondents No. 1 & 2 For Respondents No. 3 & 4 : : Mr. Triveni Shanker Sahu, Panel Lawyer Mr. Jitendra Dhruw, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Ravi Kumar Bhagat, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 17/10/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- 10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate writ order or direction, quashing the order Annexure P-1, dated 16-03-2016 passed by respondent No. 1 and be further pleased to direct the reinstatement of the petitioner on the post of secretary. Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2025.10.17 18:21:16 +0530 2 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate writ order or direction, quashing the order dated 06-11-2015 (Annexure P-2), passed by respondent No. 2. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate writ or direction, directing for conducting the enquiry on the issues which were mentioned in the application/representation of the petitioner submitted on 21-06- 2013 before the respondent No. 2. 10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate writ order or direction, directing that any further meeting on the issue of membership of the petitioner in the society/respondent No. 4 be held only after giving charge of secretary to the petitioner. 10.5 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction, directing that the enquiry be conducted in regard to the financial matter of the society for last 20 years particularly on the issue of diversion of fund of the society/respondent No. 4 for private use of the respondent No. 3. 2. The petitioner was Secretary of the Gyan Bharti Aadarsh Shikshan Samiti which is registered under the Society Registration Act 1973. He was removed from office pursuant to resolution passed by the Society dated 26.04.1998. He submitted an application before the Assistant Registrar challenging removal and when no action was taken, he filed WP No. 1141/2001 which was dismissed vide order dated 13.03.2013 reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to approach appropriate forum. Thereafter the petitioner moved an application before the Registrar, Firms and Societies, Raipur (C.G.) on 31.06.2013 and sought relief of quashment of order of removal. An order was passed by respondent No. 2 on 06.11.2015 wherein it was held that the petitioner was not afforded proper opportunity of hearing, but order of reinstatement was not passed. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing an appeal before respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 vide order dated 16.03.2016 disposed of the matter and issued a direction to call a meeting to maintain or remove the membership of the 3 petitioner within 30 days. Against said order, this petition has been preferred. 3. The State has filed its reply wherein it is sated that an enquiry was conducted against the society and report was submitted before Registrar. 4. Learned counsels appearing for the respective respondents would argue that no adverse order has been passed against the petitioner, rather direction has been issued to call meeting either to maintain or remove the membership of the petitioner. They would contend that the petitioner would be afforded sufficient opportunity in that meeting, and therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsels for the respondents and perused documents. 6. Admittedly, a meeting of society was conducted on 26.04.1998 and decision was taken to remove the petitioner from office of the Secretary of the Society. Vide order dated 16.03.2016, respondent No. 1 directed the Society to convene special meeting of general body and after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, appropriate decision be taken. As no adverse order has been passed against the petitioner and he would be afforded sufficient opportunity in that meeting, therefore, in my considered opinion, no case is made out for interference. 7. Consequently, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti