Holding

Section 53 must be construed to apply only to societies not exempted under Section 4(3); therefore, the Tamil Evangelical Lutheran Church, being a religious society, is not deemed registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975.

Summary

The Tamil Evangelical Lutheran Church (TELC), a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 in 1919 with a religious purpose, sought exemption from the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. The State Government granted limited exemptions, leading to multiple writ petitions and appeals contesting the applicability of the 1975 Act to TELC. The central issue was whether Section 53, which deems societies registered under the 1860 Act to be registered under the 1975 Act, applies to societies whose object is the promotion of religion, which are exempt under Section 4(3). The Supreme Court examined the scheme of the 1975 Act, held that applying Section 53 to religious societies would create an unjust classification violating Article 14, and therefore interpreted Section 53 to exclude societies exempted by Section 4(3). Consequently, the Court concluded that the Act does not apply to TELC. The appeal was allowed and the lower court's judgment set aside, with no order as to costs.

Issues considered

Whether Section 53 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 deems a society registered under the 1860 Act to be registered under the 1975 Act irrespective of its object.
Whether societies whose object is the promotion of religion are exempt from the provisions of the 1975 Act under Section 4(3).
Whether applying Section 53 to religious societies would violate the equality principle under Article 14 of the Constitution.

Legislation cited

Societies Registration Act, 1860
Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975s. 2(h), s. 3, s. 4(1), s. 4(2), s. 4(3), s. 53

Subjects

Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975Section 53religious societiesexemptionArticle 14constitutional lawsociety registrationcivil appeal

Judgment

[2014] 9 S.C.R. 530

A H.A. MARTIN & OTHERS
v.
MOSES THAMBI PILLAI & OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No. 8458 of 2014)
SEPTEMBER 04, 2014
B
[J. CHELAO/IESWAR AND A.K. SIKRI, JJ.]

Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 - s. 53 -
Tamil Evangelical Lutheran Church (TELC) - Whether a
C Society registered under the Act in view of s. 53 - Held: TELC
is not a Society governed by the provisions of the Act - Act
is not applicable to TELC at all - Thus, the issue of exemption
from the provisions of the Act did not arise - Section 53
declares that every Society registered under the 1860 Act shall
D be deemed to be registered under the 1975 Act - Such
construction is not called for in view of the scheme of the Act
and more particularly scheme of s. 4 - s. 4(3) expressly
excludes the operation of s. 4(1) and 4(2) thereby relieving
both the classes of Societies-the Societies formed after
E coming into the existence of the 1975 Act and the Societies
which were in existence but not registered under any law prior
to the commencement of the 1975 Act covered by Section
4(1) and 4(2) which have for their object the promotion of
religion - Such an interpretation which would be in violation
F of Art. 14 is required to be avoided - There can neither be
any reasonable basis for such classification nor any purpose
to be achieved by such classification - Neither of the parties
nor the administration or the judiciary (Bar & Bench) had the
time nor inclination to examine the scheme of the 1975 Act,
which resulted in wastage of time of the judiciary as well as
G the administration - Societies Requistration Act, 1860.

The question which arose for consideration before .
this Court was whether a Society such as Tamil

H 530
H.A. MARTIN. v. MOSES THAMBI PILLAI 531

Evangelical Lutheran Church is required to be treated as A
Society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies
Registration Act, 1975 in view of the operation of Section
53 of the Act.

Allowing the appeal, the Court
B
HELD: 1.1. Various provisions of the Tamil Nadu
Societies Registration Act, 1975 seek to. regulate the
activities of the Societies registered under the Act. The
expression "registered society" by definition under
Section 2(h) means a Society either registered or deemed C
to be registered under the Act. Section 3 of the Act
specifies various classes of Societies which could be
registered under the Act i.e. Societies which have for their
object the promotion of education, literature, science, .
religion, charity, social reform, art, crafts etc. Section 4(1) D
mandates that Societies which came into existence after
the commencement of the Act to be compulsorily
registered. Section 4(2) mandates the registration of some
Societies which were in existence as on the date of
existence of the Act. It can be seen from the language of E
Section 4(2) that only those existing Societies which
were not registered either under the 1860 Act or under
any other law which was in force in the State of Tamil
Nadu prior to the 1975 Act to be compulsorily registered.
Such obligation to compulsorily register (Societies) F
arising either under Section 4(1) or Section 4(2) does not
extend to Societies whose object is the promotion of
religion. Because under Section 4(3), Societies
established with the object of promoting either religion
or athletics or sports, are expressly excluded from the G
obligations even if they answer the description of a
Society-referred to, either under Section 4(1) or 4(2). [Para
21] [542-C-G]

1.2. No doubt, Section 53 declares that every Society
registered under the 1860 Act shall be deemed to be H
532 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 9 S.C.R.

A registered under the 1975 Act. Such a construction is not
called for in view of the scheme of the Act and more
particularly scheme of Section 4 of the Act. Section 4(3)
expressly excludes the operation of Section 4(1) and 4(2)
thereby relieving both the classes of Societies-the
B Societies formed after coming into the existence of the
1975 Act and the Societies which were in existence but
•
not registered under any law prior to the commencement
of the 1975 Act - covered by Section 4(1) and 4(2) which
have for their object the promotion of religion. The
c expression "Societies" (registered under the 1860 Act)
occurring in Section 53 must be understood to mean only
those Societies which do not fall under the exemption
granted under Section 4(3) of the Act. Otherwise the
operation of the Act would result in such an absurd
situation where Societies coming into existence after the
0
commencement of the Act or unregistered Societies
existing on the date of the commencement of the Act are
not obliged to register and comply with the discipline of
the Act but the existing registered Societies on the date
of commencement of the Act are obliged to comply,with
E the regulatory conditions of the Act, notwithstanding lhe
fact that the activity of all the abovementioned three
c.lasses of the Societies is to promote religion. Unless the
expression "Societies" occurring under Section 53 of the
Act is understood to mean Societies other than those
F whose object is promotion of religion, athletics or sports,
the Act would result in creation of two classes of
Societies having the same object, but one class is
subjected to the discipline of1the Act and the other class
exempted from it - all other things being equal except the
G accident of an existing Society on the date of the Act also
happens to be a Society registered under the 1860 Act.
Such an interpretation which would be in violation of
Article 14 is certainly required to be avoided. There can
neither be any reasonable basis for such classification
H
H.A. MARTIN. v. MOSES THAMBI PILLAI 533

nor any purpose to be achieved by such classification. A
-Therefore, the Act is not applicable to TELC at all. [Paras
22, 23] [542-H; 543-B-H; 544-A]

1.3. The entire litigation between the parties is without
any basis in law. It resulted in wastage of time of the 8
judiciary as well as the administration. Apparently neither
of the parties nor the administration had,the time to
examine or inclination to examine the scheme of the 1975
Act. Even the judiciary (Bar & Bench) did not do any better.
It is really not necessary to examine various submissions C
made in this appeal by both the parties as all the
submissions proceeded on the assumption that TELC is
a Society governed by the provisions of the Act. The
judgment under appeal is set aside. The second
respondent, if he still has any legally tenable grievance de
hors the 1975 Act, is free to pursue such remedy available D
to him under the law. [Paras 24, 25, 26] [544-B-E]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal !':Jo.
8458 of 2014.
E
From the Judgment and Order 28.02.2011 of the High
Court of Madras in Writ Appeal No. 481/2007.

V. Giri, R. Anand Padmanabhan, Ramil Pathak, C.
Lawrence, Shashi Bhushan Kumar for the Appellants.
F
T. Archana, Abhishek Krishna, S.N. Bhat for the
Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

CHELAMESWAR, J. 1. Leave. granted. G

2. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 28.2.2011 of the
Division Bench of -the High Court in Writ Appeal No.481 of
2011 the unsuccessful appellants therein preferred the instant
appeal. H
534 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014) 9 S.C.R.

A 3. The appellants are three in number. The first appellant ·
Rt. Rev. Dr. H.A. Martin is the present Bishop of the Tamil ·
Evangelical Lutheran Church (for short "TELC"). The second
appellant is shown to be the Treasure. The details of the person
holding such an office are not mentioned anywhere. The third
B appellant is the TELC, a body registered under the Societies
Registration Act, 1860 which is not capable either of suing or
being sued 1 • The 'appellants' cannot be blamed. The first
respondent herein was the petitioner 'in the writ petition. He
chose his respondents who became the appellants
c herein. In an era of public interest litigation, rules of procedure
are the first casualty.

4. The facts giving rise to this litigation are as follows:

A Society came to be registered in the year 1919 called
D Tamil Evangelical Lutheran Church (TELC). The objects of the
Society are diffusion of Christian truth amqng the Tamil
speaking people, various kinds of "moral and social activitie5'
such as, teaching and healing through pastoral evangelistic,
educational works, medical work for the amelioration of the .
E religious moral and social conditions of all classes of people."

5. In the year 1975, the State of Tamil Nadu enacted the
Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 (27 of 1975) (for
short "the Act"). Under Section 53 of the Act, every Society
F registered under the 1860 Act is deemed to be registered
under the Act. Section 53 reads as under:

1. Section 6. Suits by and against societies.- Every society registered under
this Act may sue or be sued in the name of President, Chairman, or
Principal Secretary, or trustees, as shall be determined by the rules and
!3 ·
regulations of the society and, in default of such determination, in the name
of such person as shall be appointed by the governing body for the
occasion:
Provided that it shall be competent for any person having a claim, or
demand against the society, to sue the President or Chairman, or Principal
Secretary or the trustees thereof, if on application the governing body some
H other officer or person be not nominated to be the defendant.
H.A. MARTIN. v. MOSES THAMBI PILLAI 535
[J. CHELAMESWAR, J.]
"53. Application of Act to existing registered societies.- A
Every society registered under the Societies Registration
Act, 1860 (Central Act XX.I of 1860), or under any law
corresponding to this Act in force in the transferred territory
immediately before the date of the commencement of this
Act including the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and B
Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955 (Travancore-
Cochin Act XII of 1955), shall be deemed to be
registered under this Act, and the bye-laws of such
society, ~hall, in so far as they are not inconsistent with any
provisipfl of this Act, continue in force until altered or c
rescinded."

(emphasis supplied)

6. It appears that an application was made by the earlier
Bishop and the President of the TELC to the Government to D
exempt the TELC from all the provisions of the Act
retrospectively from 22.4.1978. (Unfortunately, a copy of the
representation is not made available nor any details of the
same are available on record). The Government declined to
grant such blanket exemption and advised the Society to be E
more specific about the provisions from the operation of which
the Society seeks exemption.

7. Pursuant to the said advice, the Secretary of the Society
made further representation dated 25.7.1981 seeking
F
exemption from the provisions of Sections 14, 15(3)(4)(5),
25(3), 26(1)(4), 28(1)(2), 29(3) and 36 of the Act ..

8. By G.O. Ms. No.1708 dated 18.12.1981, the
Government of Tamil Nadu exempted the Society
retrospectively from 22.4.1978 from the operation of Sections G
15(4), 25(3) and 29(3) of the Act, the relevant portion of which
is extracted hereunder: ·

"In exercise of powers conferred by Section 54 of the
Tamilnadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 (Tamil Nadu H
536 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014) 9 S.C.R.

A Act 27 of 1975) the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby
exempts with retrospective effect from 22.4.1978:

1. The President or Bishop of the Tamil Evangelical
Lutheran Church alone from the provision of sub-
section (4) of Section 15 of the Tamilnadu
B
Societies Registration Act 1975 regarding the
period of his term that it should not exceed more
than three years; this exemption will .not apply to the
other members of the church council.

c 2. Al~o exempts the Church from the provision of sub- .
section (3) of section 25 of the Tamilnadu Societies
Registration Act 1975 so as to ratify the action
of the church in having paid the salary from
out of its fund to the President or full time
D workers of the Church who come under the
classification of "Officers" within the meaning of
clause (g) of section 2 of the said Act.

3. And also exempts the church from the provision of
sub-section (3) of section 29 of the Tamilnadu
E
Societies Registration Act 1975 subject to the
condition that necessary provisions are embodied
in the bye-laws of the society for the suppiy of
copies of minutes of the society's meeting and
Financial statements to the members at specified
F intervals, free of charge."

(emphasis supplied)

9. Not satisfied with the said order, the Secretary of the
G TELC filed the Writ Petition No.523of1982 seeking declaration
that the Act is void and inapplicable to the TELC and its
constituent bodies. The said writ petition was dismissed by an
order dated 20.2.1990, the operative portion of which reads as
under:
H "When the writ petition came up for final disposal, learned
H.A. MARTIN. v. MOSES THAMBI PILLAI 537
[J. CHELAMESWAR, J.]
Government Pleader would submit that though a counter A
affidavit had been filed contending 'that the aforesaid
provision of the Act are valid and are not violative of
constitutional provisions yet the Government would
consider any representation made by the petitioner for
grant of exemption in the light of the decided cases. Having B
regard to this submission of the learned Government
Pleader while dismissing the writ - petition as premature and.
not on merits, the petitioner is given a liberty to file a report
before the Government on or before 31.12.1990, pleading
for grant of exemption from such provisions of the c
Societies Registration Act as the petitioner may desire and
on such representation being made, orders thereon would
be passed by the first respondent on or before 30th April,
1991.

It is of course necessary to state that the Government itself D
had granted exemption in favour of the minority institutions
from the operation of certain provisions of the Act lik~
sections 15, 20 and 29. The petitioner seeks relief in
respect of the remaining provisions of the Act which are
mentioned supra." E

10. In the meanwhile the predecessor-in-interest of the first
appellant herein, one Rt. Rev. Aruldoss, was elected as Bishop
in terms of the rules of the Society and by virtue of the rules of
the Society he also became the President of the Society F
(TELC). However, certain differences of opinion arose between
Rt. Rev. Aruldoss and some of the members of the Society
including the first respondent herein. The first respondent herein
and others filed complaints dated 3.8.2001 and 28.6.2002 with
the Inspector General of Registration praying for cancellation G
of the G.O. Ms. No.1708 dated 18.12.1981 etc. The substance
of .the complaint was that the President and other office bearers
ofthe Society were continuously drawing salaries from the
Society's funds. Such payments are prohibited under the Act
and the G.O. Ms. No.1708 dated 18.12.1981 only ratified the . H
538 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014) 9 S.C.R.

A action of the Society in having paid some amounts till the date
of the order but there was no exemption enabling the Society
to make such payments subsequent to the date of the said
Government order. The Inspector General of Registration
passed an order dated 23. 7.2002.
B
11. It is difficult to state with precision as to what are the
contents of the said order. But, it appears that the Inspector
General of Registration agreed with the complaint.

12. The first respondent filed Writ Petition No.32494 of ·
C 2002 seeking a direction to the Government to take:
appropriate decision on his representation dated 3.8.2001
seeking cancellation of the abovementioned G.O. The said writ ·
petition was disposed of by an order dated 7.8.2002 directing
the Government to consider the petitioner's representation and
D pass an appropriate order on merits in accordance with law .. '

13. Pursuant to the said direction, the Government issued
proceedings by Letter No.(Ms) No.128 dated 8.11.2002, the
relevant portion of which reads as follows:
E "(iii) Exemption from Section 25(3) of the Act was granted
for ratifying the action of the Church in having paid the
salary from out of its funds to the President or full time
worker of the Church. The Government only ratified the
action of the Society in having paid salary from 29.4.1978
F to the date on which Government order was issued and
no payment has to be made thereafter since the society
was not exempted from the above provision for the future."

14. Thereafter, another application came to be made by
G the Bishop on 25.11.2002 seeking complete exemption from
the operation of Section 25(3) of the Act praying a.s follows:

"(1) to ratify the salary paid to its workers from the date
on which the Government order was passed to this date;
and
H.A. MARTIN. v. MOSES THAMBI PILLAI 539
[J. CHELAMESWAR, J.]
(2) to modify the exemption so granted by removing the A
words:

" ... or full time workers of the Church who come under the
classification of Officers within the meaning of cla~ses (g)
of Section 2 of the Act" and substituting with the following B
words:

" ... or any other officer of the Church Society by way of
honorarium for any service rendered by him to the Church
Society in future also ,as per the main provisions of the
Tamilnadu Registration Act of 1975, Section 25(3)"." c
15 .. The first respondent filed another Writ Petition
No.45886 of 2002 praying that (i) the proceedings of the
government dated 8.11.2002 referred to above be
implemented, (ii) for a direction to forbear the Bishop from D
functioning as the President of the Society (TELC), (iii) a
direction for the recovery of all the amounts that have been paid
to the President and U1e officers of the Society (TELC) from
out of the funds of the Society from 19, 12.1981. The writ petition
was allowed by order dated 11.12.2006. Aggrieved by the E
same, the Writ Appeal No.481 of 2007 was filed by the
appellants herein unsuccessfully.

16. Before we proceed to examine the correctness of the
impugned judgment, w.e deem appropriate to examine the
scheme of the Act insofar as it is relevant for the present F
purpose.

17. Chapter II of the Act deals with the constitution and
registration of the Societies. Section 32 stipulates that any
2. Section 3 - Societies which may be re~istered - (1) Subject to the G
provisions of sub-section (2), any society wniclt_has for its object the
promotion of education, literature, science; religion,Clrarity, social reform,
art, crafts, cottage industries, athletics, sports (including indoor games),
recreation, public health, social service, cultural activities, the diffusion of
useful knowledge or such other useful object with respect to which the
State Legislature has power to make laws for the State, which may be
prescribed, may be registered under this Act. H
540 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 9 S.C.R.

A Society which has for its object the promotion of education,
literature, science, religion, charity, social reform, art, crafts etc.
may be registered under the Act.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) no association
which has for its object the improvement of the economic condition of
B workmen, no club where games of chance providing prizes for winners
are played and no society which does not consist of at least seven persons
shall be registered under this Act.
3. Section 4 - Compulsory registration of certain societies - (1) Subject to
the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4), every society formed on or after
the date of the commencement of this Act, which has for its object any
C object mentioned in, or prescribed under section 3, and
Ea) which consists of not less than twenty members, or
(b) whose annual gross income or expenditure in any financial year after
the dat~ of the commencement of this Act, is not less than ten thousand
rupees,
shall be registered under this Act within such period· as may be prescribed.
·D
(2) Every society in existence on the date of commencement of this Act,
which has for its object any object mentioned in, or prescribed under
section 3 and which has not been registered under the Societies
Registration Act, 1860 (Central Act XXI of 1860), or under any law
corresponding to this Act in force in the transferred territory immediately
before the date of the commencement of this Act including the Travancore-
E Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Socieities Registration Act, 1955
(Travancore-Cochin Act XII of 1955) and
(i) which consists of not less than twenty members; or
(ii) whose annual gross income or expenditure in any financial year after the
date of the commencement of this Act, is not less than ten thousand rupees;
or
F (iii) whose gross income or expenditure in any such period preceding the
date of the commencement of this Act, was not less than such amount,
as may be prescribed, the period so prescribed, bearing to twelve months
the same proportion as the amount so prescribed bears to ten thousand
rupees;
shall be registered under this Act within such period as may be prescribed.
G (3) Nothing in this section shall apply to any society which has for its object
the promotion of religion, atheletics or sports (including indoor games).
Nothing contained in this Act shall be deemed to require the registration
under this Act of any society formed, established, registered or incorporated
under any other law.

H
H.A. MARTIN. v. MOSES THAMBI PILLAI 541
[J. CHELAMESWAR, J.)
18. Section 4 3 declares that every Society formed on or A
·after the date of the commencement of the Act, consisting not
less than twenty members; or whose annual gross income or
expenditure in any financial year after the date ot' the
commencement of the Act is not less than ten thousand rupees,
shall be registered under the Act. Section 4(2) stipulates that B
every existing Society, NOT registered under the 1860 Act with
any one of the objects specified in Section 3, and which
consists of not less than twenty members or whose annual
income or expenditure in any financial year is not less than ten
thousand rupees etc. shall be registered under the Act. c
However, sub-section (3) of Section 4 declares that "nothing
in this section shall apply to any Society which has for its object
the promotion of religion, athletics or sports including indoor
games".

19. Chapter ti-I of the Act deals with the management and D
administration of the registered Society. Section 15(1 ) 4
mandates that every registered Society sha.11 have a committee
of not less than three members to manage its affairs. Section
15(4)5 limits the tenure of such members of the Committee for
a period of three years from the date of their appointment. E

20. Section 25(1) 5 of the Act recognizes the power of the
Society to spend such amount out of its funds as it thinks fit for
the purposes authorised by the Act or the bye-laws of the
Society. Section 25(2) prescribes some restric.t_ions on the F
expenditure by the Society, the details of which are not

4. Section 15. Committee - (1) Every registered society shall have a committee
of not less than three members to manage its affairs. Every registered
society shall file with the Registrar a copy of the register maintained by it
under sub-section (1) of Section 14 and from time to time, file with the G
Registrar notice of any change among the members of the committee.
5. Section 15(4) - The term of office of the members of the committee shall
not exceed three years from the date of their appointment.
6. Section 25 - Application of funds of a registered society.-(1) A registered
society shall have power to spend out of its funds such sums as it thinks
fit on purposes authorised by this Act or its bye-laws. H
542 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 9 S.C.R.

A necessary for our purpose. Sub-section (3) which is the relevant
provision for the decision in this case reads as follows:

"Save as provided in sub-section (2), no payment shall be ·
made out of the funds of a registered society to the
president or any other officer of the society by way of
B
honorarium for any service rendered by him to the society."

21. Various provisions of the Act seek to regulate the
activities of the Societies registered under the Act. The
expression "registered society'' by definition under Section 2(h)
C means a Society either registered or deemed to be registered
under the Act. Section 3 of the Act specifies various classes
of Societies which could be registered under the Act i.e.
Societies which have for their object the promotion of
education, literature, science, religion, charity, social reform, art,
D crafts etc. Section 4(1) mandates that Societies which came
into existence after the commencement of the Act to be
compulsorily registered. Section 4(2) mandates the registration
of some Societies which were in existence as on the date of
" '
'·:-~ existence of the Act. It can be seen from the language of
E' Section 4(2) that only those existing Societies which were not
registered either under the 1860 Act or under any other law
which was in force in the State of Tamil Nadu prior to the 1975
Act to be compulsorily registered. Such obligation to
compulsorily register (Societies) arising either under Section
F 4(1) or Section 4(2) does not extend fo Societies whose object
is the promotion of religion. Because under Section 4(3),
Societies established wlth the object of promoting either
religion or atheletics or sports, are expressly excluded from the
obligations even if they answer the description of a Society
G referred to, either under Section 4(1) or 4(2).

22. At this stage, we are required to examine the effect of
Section 53. No doubt, Section 53 declares that every Society
registered under the 1860 Act shall be deemed to be reg'istered
under the 1975 Act. Question is - whether a Society such as
Hi
H.A. MARTIN. Ii. MOSES THAMBI PILLAI 543
[J. CHELAMESWAR, J.]
TELC is required to be treated as Society registered under the A
Act (1975 Act) in view of the operation of Section 53?

23. We are of the opinion that such a construction is not
called for in view of the scheme of the Act and more particularly
scheme of Section 4 of the Act. We have already noticed that 8
Section 4(3) expressly excludes the operation of Section 4(1)
and 4(2) thereby relieving both the classes of Societies -- the
Societies formed after coming into the existence of the 1975
Act and the Societies which were in existence but not
registered under any law prior to the commencement of the C
1975 Act - covered by Section 4(1) and 4(2) which have for
their object the promotion of religion. In our opinion, the
expression "Societies" (registered under the 1860 Act)
occurring in Section 53 must be understood to mean only those
Societies which do.not fall under the exemption granted under
Section 4(3) of the Act. Otherwise the operation of the Act D
would result in such an absurd situation where Societies
coming into existence after the commencement of the Act or
unregistered Societies existing on the date of the
commencement of the Act are not obliged to register and
comply with the discipline of the Act but the existing registered · E
Societies on the date of commencement of the Act are obliged
to comply with the regulatory conditions of the AcJ,
notwithstanding the fact that the activity of all the
abovementioned three classes of the Societies is to promote
religion. Unless the expression "Societies" occurring under F
Section 53 of the Act is understood to mean Societies other
than those whose object is promotion of religion, atheletics or
sports,. the Act would result in creation of two classes of
Societies having the same object, but one class is subjected
to the discipline of the Act and the other class exempted from G
it - all other things being equal except the accident of an existing
Society_ on the date of the Act also happens to be a Society
registered under the 1860 Act. Such an interpretation which
would be in violation of Article 14 is certainly required to be
avoided. There can neither be any reasonable basis for such H
544 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 9 S.C.R.

A classification nor any purpose to be achieved by such
classification. Therefore, the Act is not applicable to TELC at
all.

24. Looked at in the abovementioned background of the
8 statutory scheme, we are of the opinion that the entire litigation
between the parties herein is without any basis in law. It resulted
in wastage of time of the judiciary as well as the administration.
Apparently neither of the parties nor the administration had the
time to examine or inclinatkin to examine the scheme of the
C 1975 Act. We are sorry to say, even the judiciary (Bar & Bench)
did not do any better.

25. In view of our above conclusion, it is really not
necessary for us to examine various submissions made in this-
appeal by both the parties as all the submissions proceeded
D on the assumption that TELC is a Society governed by the
provisions of the Act.

26. For the above reasons, the appeal is allowed. The
judgment under appeal is set- aside. The second respondent,
E if he s@ has any legally tenable grievance de hors the 1975
Act, is free to pursue such remedy available to him under the
law.

27. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there wHI
be no order as to costs.
F
Nidhi Jain Appeal allowed.