Certain criminal proceedings followed.
32 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ restraining the State of Delhi and the newly companystituted Board under the impugned Act, the State from enforcing the provisions of the impugned Act and the new Board from exercising any functions thereunder.
An alternative companytention was also raised on behalf of the petitioner on the basis of certain decisions and my opinion in Servants of India Society, Poona v. The Charity Commissioner of Bombay 1 to the effect that upon registration J. the Board became at least a quasi corporation.
This Act same into fore on October 10, 1952.
The office bearers of the Board and the Managing Committee were to be the same and companysisted of 1 a President, ii a Senior Vice President, iii a Junior Vice President, iv a Secretary, v a Financial Secretary, and vi a Joint Secretary.
An affidavit made by the then Financial Secretary was also placed before us.
On the withdrawal of the suit, an application was made for making over possession of the properties to the new Board.
5 of 1952 , hereinafter referred to as the impugned Act.
When the suit was still pending, the Delhi State Legislature passed an Act called the Tibbia College Act, 1952 Delhi Act No.
He died in the year 1927.
After the passing of the impugned Act, the suit instituted before the Subordinate Judge, the Delhi was withdrawn.
The petition was subsequently amended in the manner already indicated by us.
The financial year of the Board was to be from April 1 to March 31 of each year, and the annual subscription to be paid by a member of the Board was fixed at Rs.
One Hakim Mohammad Ajmal Khan was a physician of Unani medicine of all India repute.
On October 18, 1949, a suit was brought in the companyrt of the senior Subordinate Judge, Delhi under H. 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Secretary and 31 members of the Board.
These receivers took possession of the Dawakhana and the companylege between October 19 and 23, 1949.
12/ per annum payable in advance before April 30 of each year.
This new Board is called the Tibia Delhi College Board and we shall Refer to it as the new Board.
This companytention has also been negatived by my learned brother.
The present petition was then filed on March 14, 1955, in pursuance of that resolution.
That application was allowed in spite of the objection of petitioner number 1.
But before his death, in the year 1911, he along with certain other persons formed a society styled Anjuman i Tibbia and had it registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 Act XXI of 1860 .
The pharmaceutical institute was also managed by it, though at one stage petitioner No.
In the year 1948 Shri Rameshwar Dayal, the then Collector of Delhi, and Dr. Yudhvir Singh the then President of the Delhi Municipal Committee, and certain other persons were elected as members of the Board.
Purushottam Tricumdas, J. B. Dadachanji Ravindra Narain and O. C. Mathur, for the petitioner.
Rule 13 provided for the formation of a Managing Committee companysisting of nine members and six officials for a period of three years and the functions of the Managing Committee were also prescribed in the rules.
Rule 6 laid down the circumstances in which the office of a member should be deemed to be vacant, and one of such circumstances was the failure of a member to pay him annual subscription before the date fixed for such payment.
It was stated in r. 5 that one third of the members of the Board should be Hakims and Vaids.
The State of Delhi and the new Board are the respondents to the present petition.
There were also rules regarding a power of inspection of the companylege, hostel etc.,
The main objects of the Board were thus stated in the rules a to establish companyleges for the purpose of imparting higher education in the Unani and Ayurvedic systems of medicine to the inhabitants of India b to improve the indigenous systems of medicine on scientific lines and for that purpose to establish one or more pharmaceutical institutes dawakhanas and c to have medical books companypiled and translated and to adopt other means which might enhance the popularity of those systems and add to the information of the people in general on hygiene etc.
Dr. Yudhvir Singh was elected President and one Shri Mool Chand Gagerna was appointed Joint Secretary.
The first petitioner is the Board of Trustees, Ayurvedic and Unani Tibbia College, Delhi, through Hakim Mohammed Jamil Khan, stated to be its properly elected Secretary.
The short facts giving rise to the petition are these.
If, as the petitioner says the Board, after registration under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 was transformed into a companyporation the Delhi Legislative assembly companyld number make a LAW with respect to it under Entry 32 because though under the first part thereof it can make a law affecting companyporation, its powers cannot reach a companyporation, the objects of which extend beyond the limit of the Delhi State.
32 of the Constitution of India for enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
14 of the petition.
Petitioner number 1 unsuccessfully moved the High Court of Punjab against that order.
K. DAS, J. This is a writ petition on behalf of two petitioners.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Petition No.
The respondents to the petition raised a number of preliminary objections, and on December 13, 1954, the writ petition was withdrawn.
2 claimed the institute as his private property.
On January 11, 1955, the Managing Committee passed a resolution authorising the Secretary to institute a proceeding in this Court to enforce the fundamental rights of petitioner number 1.
Soon after the elections in 1948, a struggle ensued between different groups of members for obtaining companytrol of the Board and the companylege, and for possession of the Hindustani Dawakhana.
October 23.
The Board ran the Tibbia College and an attached hostel.
Certain rules and regulations were made for the functioning of the Board, which were amended from time to time.
2 was added as one of the petitioners, and certain new grounds of attack were added in para.
The maximum number of members called trustees in the rule was 35 to be elected from all the then Provinces of India.
96 of 1955.
As a result of the amendments allowed petitioner No.
Petition under Art.
K. Daphtary, Solicitor General of India, R. L. Iyengar and T.M. Sen, for the respondents.
The petition was initially filed on behalf of the first petitioner.
The name of the society was changed in 1915, and it became known as the Board of Trustees, Ayurvedic and Unani Tibbia College, Delhi.
was delivered by Das, J. Mudholkar, J., delivered a separate Judgment.
The Judgment of Sinha, C. J., Das, Sarkar and Ayyangar, JJ.,
In that suit an application was made for the appointment of a receiver and on October 19, 1949, the Subordinate Judge appointed two local advocate as joint receivers with plenary powers.
Subsequently, an amendment petition was moved which was allowed by us.
The second petitioner is Hakim Mohammad Jamil Khan himself, who states that he is still one of the trustees or members of the said Board.
He also established a medical companylege known as the Tibbia College.
He lived in Delhi and started a pharmaceutical institute in the town known as Hindustani Dawakhana in the year 1903.
Thereafter, petitioner number 1 moved this Court under Art.
