PANAJI
The High Court of Bombay at Goa on Monday upheld the District Registrar's decision to order an independent audit of the Goa Cricket Association (GCA), ruling that the direction was only an interim step to assist an inquiry into allegations of financial irregularities and did not affect the association's rights or warrant judicial interference.
The Bench of Justice Neela Gokhale dismissed the GCA’s writ petition challenging the District Registrar’s May 29 order appointing a panel of independent auditors to examine the association's accounts, holding that the Registrar had acted within the powers conferred under the Societies Registration Act. The court, however, extended for one week the interim stay granted on June 3.
The GCA had argued that the audit order was illegal, passed without application of mind, and formed part of a politically motivated attempt to take over the association. It also contended that the complainant had not disclosed the source of documents relied upon to allege financial mismanagement and that disputes ought to have first been referred to the association's Ombudsman.
Rejecting the challenge, the court found that the Registrar had not received the GCA's complete audit report for 2024-25 as required under Sections 12C and 12D of the Act, with only a covering letter and a single page of the audit report having been submitted.
“The IG was never furnished with a copy of the complete internal audit report. There was no compliance with Sections 12C and 12D of the Act,” it said.
The court held that, in these circumstances, directing an independent audit was a legitimate step to enable the Registrar to form an opinion under Section 20A while examining complaints alleging financial mismanagement.
“The impugned order is an intervening order to facilitate an inquiry under Section 20A of the Act... Respondent No.2-IG has acted within the scope and ambit of his jurisdiction. The impugned order thus needs no interference,” it further stated.
The judgment noted that the Registrar had not yet passed any final order against the association and that the independent audit would merely assist him in deciding whether further action under the Act was warranted.
The court also rejected the GCA's contention that the dispute should first have been taken before the association's Ombudsman, observing that the complaints involved allegations of siphoning of funds, irregular expenditure and financial mismanagement, matters that fell within the Registrar's statutory jurisdiction under Section 20A rather than the Ombudsman's remit.
Justice Gokhale further held that the Registrar's decision to seek a panel of auditors from the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, Goa Branch, could not be faulted merely because he could alternatively have directed the association to furnish its complete audit report.
