The Scouts Guides Organization v. The Union Of India

$~45 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 6667/2017 THE SCOUTS GUIDES ORGANISATION ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr Sanjeev B. Sinha, Advocate.

versus THE UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through:

Mr Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC for UOI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 04.08.2017 CM No. 27760/2017 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 6667/2017 & CM No.27759/2017 3.

The petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and claims to be involved in imparting training of scouts/guides in India. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under:- "b.

issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the impugned order No.F.N.-46-5/2015 NPYAD dated13th JUNE '2016 issued by respondent; c.

issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the Respondent not to proceed with any further actions pursuant to the aforesaid impugned letter;

d.

issue a direction to respondent to issue a fresh order to all concerned States and Union Territories to extend cooperation to the Petitioner;"

4.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the respondent's letter dated 13.06.2016; a bare perusal of the said letter dated 13.06.2016 (which is impugned in the present petition) indicates that the respondent has informed all the Chief Secretaries of the States/Union Territories that the petitioner is not an autonomous body under the Ministry of Youth Affairs as claimed by the petitioner on its letterheads/banners/posters. The said letter also states that it has come to the notice of respondent that the petitioner has been representing that it is affiliated with the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the said letter has been issued on a bald allegation that the petitioner has been misusing the name of the respondent. He states that the petitioner's letterhead does not represent the petitioner as an organization affiliated with the respondent. He further states that the petitioner is an independent society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and has not been granted any affiliation or recognition by the respondent.

6.

In view of the above, it is apparent that the information provided in the impugned letter that the petitioner is not affiliated to the respondent is correct and, therefore, no orders in that regard are required to be passed. 7.

The real grievance of the petitioner appears to be that the petitioner has not been affiliated or recognised by the respondent. In this regard, the

petitioner had filed another petition being W.P.(C) no.7223/2015 which was disposed of by this Court by an order dated 31.07.2015 directing the respondent to decide the representation made by the petitioner in that regard. The respondent decided the said representation in compliance with the order passed by this court and has passed an order dated 01.10.2015 giving detailed reasons as to why the petitioner's request for recognition has not been acceded to. The said decision is not impugned in the present petition. And, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in respect of that decision. 8.

The petition and the application are, accordingly, dismissed. VIBHU BAKHRU, J AUGUST 04, 2017 MK