The Pennington Committee v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 29.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN The Pennington Committee, Rep. by its Secretary, Mr.A.M.M.Radha Shankar.
...
Petitioner Vs 1 The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
2 The Sub-Collector, Sivakasi Division, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.
...
Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records of the 1st respondent made in Na.Ka.C4-13192-2019, dated 22.04.2025, and quash the same as illegal and without jurisdiction and
consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the management of the petitioner Committee.
For Petitioner :
Mr.V.Radhakrishnan, Senior Counsel, for Mr.V.Shathurthi Raja.
For Respondents : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, Addl. Advocate General, for Mr.S.Shaji Bino, Spl. Govt. Pleader.
ORDER
The petitioner seeks for the following relief : ''Writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records of the 1st respondent made in Na.Ka.C4-13192-2019, dated 22.04.2025, and quash the same as illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the management of the petitioner Committee.''
2. The petitioner is a Society, registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act,1975. The Society has a long history. It was formed in the name of the then District Collector of Tirunelveli - Mr.Pennington. The purpose for formation of the Society was for running a library. As the library required funds, in the open space belonging to the Society, shops have been constructed. After construction of the library, shops were built and let out for rent. The District Collector is the ex officio President of the Society. On bifurcation of Tirunelveli District and creation of Virudhunagar District, the District Collector of Virudhunagar is presently the ex officio President of the Society.
3. The petitioner owns about 242 shops on Netaji Road, a very important landmark in the town of Srivilliputhur. On account of the fact that the town of Srivilliputhur was expanding and the traffic was also increasing, in 2001, the petitioner opened a Cycle Stand in order to augment the income of the Society and also to de-congest the area.
4. This is not the first time the Society has approached this Court. Earlier, the District Registrar, Ramanathapuram, had initiated proceedings,
which were challenged before this Court by way of two writ petitions in W.P.Nos.2961 and 2962 of 1983. The said writ petitions were allowed by Hon'ble Mr.Justice J.Kanakaraj, (as His Lordship then was). He held that the action initiated by the District Registrar against the Society reeks of arbitrariness. Subsequently, the petitioner knocked the doors of this Court again in the year 1997. That was in W.P.No.12409 of 1997 Batch, in which the respondents were District Collector, Tahsildar, and Commissioner of Srivilliputhur Panchayat Union. The grievance expressed therein was that the District Collector had issued a Memo on 05.08.
1997, calling upon the Secretary of the petitioner Society to collect rent from shopkeepers occupying the shops owned by the petitioner, and to keep the amount so collected in Trust till a decision was taken on the functioning of the Society. This Court, by an order, dated 13.12.1999, held that the District Collector cannot interfere in the internal affairs of the Society, and held that ''The interference of the Collector is nothing but interference in the internal administration of the Committee.'' Consequent to this discussion, the writ petition came to be allowed. Subsequently, another writ petition came to be filed in the year 2014.
Srivilliputhur Municipality had issued an order, based on an audit report, calling upon the petitioner to pay a certain sum. That writ petition came to be allowed by this Court, with a further direction to the respondents to consider the plea for waiver of licence fee for the library.
5. I have narrated the history of the litigations initiated against the Society in order to point out that even in the year 1992, this Court was persuaded to take note of the fact that the Revenue Department had a grievance as against the Society.
6. The cause of action for this writ petition is that the first respondent had issued a notice on 22.04.2025. By the said notice, the first respondent called upon the petitioner to submit a "white paper" in the following terms :
Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition.
7. I have heard Mr.V.Radhakrishnan, learned Senior Counsel, representing Mr.V.Shathurthi Raja, for the petitioner; and Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, learned Additional Advocate General, representing Mr.S.Shaji Bino, Special Government Pleader, for the respondents.
8. The learned Additional Advocate General fairly stated that there is no jurisdiction vested in the first respondent to issue a letter, calling upon the petitioner Society to submit a white paper and that recording the same, this writ petition may be disposed.
9. Under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act,1975, certain authorities are identified by the legislature for the purpose of administration and governance of a Society, registered under the Act. The District Collector is not one such authority. The District Collector is the ex officio President. In that capacity, it is always open to him to visit the premises of the writ petitioner Society and inspect such records, as he desires, as permitted by the rules framed under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act,1975. However, it is not open to him to call upon a Society, of which he is only a member in an ex officio capacity, to submit a "white paper".
10. As a fair statement has been made by the learned Additional Advocate General, the impugned order is quashed. Liberty is granted to the first respondent to inspect the records of the petitioner Society, if he so desires, strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies
Registration Act and the Rules made thereunder.
11. Writ Petition is allowed accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected W.M.P.(MD) No.8983 of 2025 is closed. 29.04.2025 NCC :
Yes / No (2/2) Index :
Yes / No Internet :
Yes / No dixit To:
1 The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
2 The Sub-Collector, Sivakasi Division, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
dixit (2/2) 29.04.2025