N Zubemo Lotha, LLM
Advocate, Gauhati High Court
In the late 1990s the great statesman and the least controversial of the Indian Prime Ministers so far, Atal Bihari Vajpayee felt extremely disheartened by the frequent changes of government at the center which was viewed as damaging for the progress of India. When Atal Bihari Vajpayee failed to secure the majority in parliament by just 1 vote, he clearly mentioned that he could have formed the government by approaching MPs of opposition, but he refused to be part of unethical and immoral politics. Therefore, cutting across political lines and opposition, he had the moral courage to declare if Manmohan Singh is made the prime minister of India, opposition BJP will support congress for the stability of India, for in Manmohan he saw the ability and integrity to lead India. That revealed the core honesty, maturity, integrity and statesmanship of Mr. Vajpayee who believed that the interest of the nation is bigger than the political parties. Likewise, the old pension scheme being an excessive financial burden on the State exchequer, it was replaced by the NPS even though scrapping of the old pension scheme was a big determinant of Vajpayee and the BJP in the next election – as speculated, BJP lost the next election, however, NPS is considered to have a long-term effect on the financial stability of India in the years to come. For a leader, it is expected that the common interest of the people and the nation should come first rather than personal fame or benefits.
Today, leadership crisis has created confusions within the church in Wokha and in the recent conflict the issue of LBCA being a registered society has been debated to the extent of invoking the interference of the concerned government authority - the Registrar of Societies. It is appropriate that religious organizations are registered as a society so that its activities are recognized as legitimate and also becomes a protective instrument of the government. When an organization or a church is registered as a society under the prescribed scheme of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, then that particular society acquires a legal authority having a perpetual succession with the power to acquire, hold, incur debts and dispose of property of all forms and can enter into contract, sue and be sued in the name of the society, and also becomes eligible to receive donations including other tax exemptions. The management of the society and election of the governing board (or leadership) is guided by the memorandum and articles of association prepared by the members themselves and, until the registrar removes it from the register according to rules prescribed under the act, it has everlasting existence. Therefore, it is of absolute importance that the memorandum of association including rules and regulations is framed inclusive of all the activities the society intends to undertake, the conduct, election and expulsion of members, issues as to settlement of internal disputes arising within members and that all these rules and regulations shall be framed in conformity with the Societies Registration Act, 1980. The government or no person or authority has scope to interfere in the activities or the properties of the registered society provided they organize their activities within the objective of the society.
Unless the articles of association of the society have express provisions on how to remove a member of a society, then under the Societies Registration Act, 1980, the only ground to expel a member is when he failed to subscribe the prescribed annual membership fee but before such a member is expelled, he must be served a notice why he should not pay the membership fee, and until expulsion, he still remains a member but without right to vote. A society can be dissolved only when three-fifth of the members of society may determine it shall be dissolved anytime, and such proposal be sent to the appropriate government whereby the government shall give opportunity to the governing board to give representation, and as the case may be consider the representation or dissolve. Upon dissolution, all debts and liabilities of the society (if any) shall be cleared, and any property whatsoever shall be given to some other society having identical and similar objective to be determined by votes of not less than three-fifth of the members present personally or by proxy at the time of the dissolution, and when there is no such other identical society then the society shall vest in the authority and decision of the government, and thereafter in case of further disputes the civil court has been endowed with the power to take appropriate decisions available according to the act.
The intent of the legislature to promote establishment of society and to have it organized within the spectrum of the government recognition is mainly to augment legal stipulations so that societies are established within the frame work of the Constitution of India. Therefore, societies are encouraged to be established comprising of like-minded individuals for communal purpose to act co-operatively for development and the advancement of activities of arts, literature, religion, education, charity, etc. Under the Right to Information Act, any citizen has a legal right to ask for any information with respect to any society. The Act does not mandate the registration of societies, therefore it can exist either as registered or unregistered. However, disadvantages are such that unregistered society cannot be considered as a separate legal entity, and also does not have the right to sue another party or to enforce legal proceedings in court for settling disputes. Registration, ownership and transfer of properties becomes challenging and also tax exemptions are not available, and more often than not unregistered society are viewed by the general public as doubtful organization without any credibility.
Disputes are bound to arise in the course of establishment and management of a society, however, the nature and causes of the dispute are required to be analyzed carefully. The members of the society are required to differentiate whether the nature of dispute pertains to disagreement among members of the managing committee; or, whether the nature of dispute pertains to disagreement among the members of the society; or, whether the dispute pertains to dissolution of the society. Disputes with regard to the management or leadership of the society can be settled internally based on the existing rules the society has framed for the purpose of discipline. However, disputes with regard to the dissolution of the society involves diversified questions as to whether the society has acted or is involved in any action subversive of law and order, or whether the society has been mismanaged in such a manner that the society in the present form has become impossible to fulfill the objective it was created for. If a society is reported to be involved in any illegal activity then it shall be imperative upon the law and order authorities to take action to ban and punish the offender society; if however the society has been mismanaged to the extent that it is no longer serving the purpose it was created for then the members of not less than three-fifth of the society shall write to the appropriate government to dissolve the society as per law.
In the absence of any established rules for management of disputes, then the basic approach of natural justice should be adopted. Natural justice in simple terms is such that, a disciplinary committee be formed in such cases and upon framing of charges that were found to be inconsistent of the objects of the society, the concerned member or employee should be given an opportunity to explain or give reasons as to why action should not be taken against him. Thereafter, based on the evidences and reasons submitted by the charged member or employee final action should be taken. Furthermore, when an appointment of a member to a governing body has been made through election by majority votes then the removal of such person from such leadership post can be done through the same process of removal or expulsion by majority vote process when such governing board member loses the confidence of its members on the basis of principles of democracy and of conventions, even though such society may not have express provisions for impeachment or expulsion of a member under their rules or constitution.
Having thus analyzed the theoretical framework and coming back to the sad state of affairs of the LBCA, the ongoing dispute within the church in Wokha started as a result of majority of members of the association losing confidence in the leadership of the present management committee of the society known as Lotha Baptist Churches Association (LBCA) which is the apex organization of the Baptist Churches in Wokha, because of which its members agitated to the extent that the present leadership should resign and a new governing body should be formed. However, when the present governing body reiterated its stand that they are holding the office as per its constitution and all attempts to disturb the affairs of the existing managing committee is illegal, a new group was formed by holding a general conference with the consent of the majority of the members under the title LBCA (Reformation) with the hopes to reconstruct the existing society in conformity with the constitution of the LBCA society. Upon the creation of new managing committee known as the LBCA(R), the existing leadership requested the government for protection of its interests claiming that the new group LBCA(R) has been established arbitrarily without any legal authority. The LBCA in the present leadership continues to resist any attempts to dissolve its leadership by seeking refuge and protection under the Societies Registration Act, 1860.
Apart from the aforesaid general contentions regarding the dispute, the LBCA(R) continues to question the conscience of the LBCA as well as the government and citizens alike as to: firstly, on what authority the current LBCA governing body has the right to hold the office when the majority of the members has absolutely withdrawn support to their leadership; Secondly, the present LBCA is being criticized the new incumbent Executive Secretary has been elected in an arbitrary manner in total disregard to the constitution of the LBCA which prescribes for election of the Executive Secretary through general conference by all the constituent churches. Thirdly, the LBCA is criticized on the ground that in total disregard to the constitution and by an arbitrary action, the present LBCA who is the minority group has expelled from its membership the majority of the members who are showing resentment against the present leadership; fourthly, in total disregard to the decisions of the majority of the members the present governing board known as the office bearers refuse to resign the office.
With all these conflicting issues at hand and the district magistrate having exhausted all available remedies available in such authority, the matter was forwarded to the appropriate authority as per rules of the Societies Registration Act, 1980 – the Registrar of Societies for arbitration and dispute resolution where the Registrar after examining the case and by giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties issued an order to the extent that since the dispute of the society of LBCA originated because of loss of confidence in the present leadership, the society of LBCA has been directed to conduct a general conference for a motion of confidence to establish a consensus leadership. The order of the Registrar of Societies has been welcomed as a wise decision and democratic by the majority of the constituent churches led by LBCA(R) however, the present LBCA leadership has shown resentment to the order of the Registrar which directed to conduct the motion of confidence, thereby submitting a representation to the appellate authority– the Home Commissioner by expressing determination that to the extent of bloodshed they will defend their leadership. The decision of the appellate authority is awaited. However, in the meantime when the Hon’ble Appellate Authority has not even given his judgement, the present LBCA has filed a Writ Petition in the Hon’ble High Court challenging the order of the Registrar and seeking for Stay of the said order.
As a matter of personal opinion, I am afraid, the Hon’ble High Court may dismiss the Writ Petition at the threshold because the case in the present form lacks maintainability before the High Court to interfere because alternative remedies under the prescribed statute are still available, however, may the decision of the Hon’ble Lordship prevail. Therefore, as of now, in the absence of any adverse orders from the appellate authority, I am confident and thereby encourage all the members of the LBCA to prepare as per the directions given by the Registrar of Societies to conduct the general conference for the test of no-confidence motion by 21st October 2022, for at present this is the only effective order to be followed by the society, so that disputes and confusions within the LBCA is resolved in the interest of peace and justice.
Questions continue to invoke the sentiments and conscience of the church and citizens alike as to how the management of the society of LBCA cannot be organized on the basis of the majority decision of its members. It also does astonish citizens on the question of moral principles, integrity and ethics of Christian leadership in Wokha as to how there continues to exist some seemingly evil pastors to the extent that instead of resolving disagreements with humility, understanding and prayer, should they prefer war over peace. It also puts minds to question whether the majority of the church members should stay idle and silent even though they know the organization is heading in the wrong direction because of whatever reason – should they not at least reprimand or censure acts of its members?
To conclude with personal opinions based on the Societies Registration Act, 1860, it has been observed that despite thumping majority the reason the LBCA(R) has failed to establish its authority upon the society of LBCA is mainly because they have failed to approach the appropriate government by taking steps as contemplated in the Societies Registration Act. The dissolution of the society of LBCA in the present circumstances does not arise because the majority of the society of the LBCA is not against the society but against the existing governing board members which if not resolved would frustrate the activities of the society. Further, the society in the existing circumstances cannot be managed as per the legitimate expectations of the members and citizens, because when the majority members has withdrawn support of the existing leadership, there is no ground for minority leadership to conduct the affairs of the society in a democratic manner except in arbitrary manner. One thing to keep in mind always is the decision of the majority of not less than three-fifth is the prescribed strength projected by the societies registration act for resolving disputes, therefore on such strength of majority the members could resolve any issues or disputes as it deem fit, as such, I see no infirmity in the decision taken by the Registrar of Societies directing to conduct motion of confidence to elect consensus leadership. Again, there is no provision under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, nor any provisions under the Constitution of the LBCA or under the Constitution of India nor under the Holy Bible that the mandate of holding the office of governing board of a society can be achieved by bloodshed because it is undemocratic and criminal and foolish… hahaha! The ongoing dispute among church leaders is highly discouraging and misleading for the Christian-Baptist faith and a bad example set for the upcoming generation, exploitative and offensive to reason and morality. Without prejudice to none, the position of the minority group of LBCA is untenable and is unlikely to survive concerted challenge before the appropriate authority. It shall always be the common interest of the society and of Christ that shall come first rather than personal interests.
