Voluntary Social Welfare Agency (Registration and Control) Ordinance, 1961
Registration certificate issue- The respondent had been in the management of the NGO "আপন গ্রাম প্রগতি" for a good number of years. When the respondent returned, after retiring from the government service and was elected as the President of the said NGO, the appellants who had themselves been part of the organization, came out from it and obtained registration of the name "Own Village Advancement (OVA)" for his newly created organization, having same/similar type of work plan. This is clearly malafide.
It appears upon going through the constitution of the respondent No.l's organization "আপন গ্রাম প্রগতি", (Annexure- A(I)) which has been approved/ acknowledged by the authority of the government and on the basis of which registration (Annexure-) has been issued, the name of the organization has been given as "আপন গ্রাম প্রগতি". The aims and object of which encircles development of the people of 13 villages of Lalmonirhat by providing education, healthcare, work and other social and economical activities in developing their livelihood as self sufficient persons. Whereas from Annexures filed by the writ respondent No.8 (present appellant No. 1) the fact of registration and acknowledgement of the organization "আপন গ্রাম প্রগতি" as "Own Village Advancement (OVA)" by the authority of the government as well as by him also appears to be true (Annexures 2 to 8 all issued on different dates between 1985 to 1997) prior to present appellants obtaining new registration as 'Own Village Advancement (OVA)" in 2000 AD. The appellants, it appears, have taken over the management of the "আপন গ্রাম প্রগতি" "(OVA)" and for their own interests have got the English version of the name used by the respondent No. 1 registered as their organization. Such action is illegal and mala-fide as the same is nothing but to deceive the people as well as the foreign donors.
The findings and decision arrived at by the High Court Division being based on proper appreciation of fact and law, the same do not call for any interference by this Division. This civil appeal is dismissed. ....Moyezul Islam Moyez (Md.) =VS= Upendranath Das, [7 LM (AD) 96]
The Voluntary Social Welfare Agencies (Registration and Control) Ordinance, 1961
Section 9
It appears that all the three courts, on proper consideration of the facts, cir- cumstances and evidence on record and also examining the relevant law held the concurrent view that none of the circumstances and conditions stated in section 9 of Voluntary Social Welfare Agencies (Registration and Control) Ordinance, 1961 was prevail- ing and in that circumstances the regis- tration authority had no power to dissolve the existing governing body of the samity and to form an ad-hoc com-mittee and as such the formation of ad- hoc committee and the subsequent election of the governing body held by that ad-hoc committee and also the said elected governing body of the samity were all illegal and, therefore, all the activities of that ad-hoc committee and the elected committee were illegal. Aysha Siddiqua vs. Ms. Fazilatunnesa (Nazmun Ara Sultana J) (Civil) 10 ADC 232
