Team Goemkarponn
PANAJI: Inspector General of Societies Recommends Appointment of Administrator; Says Mandatory Notice Norms Were Not Followed
In a significant ruling, the Inspector General of Societies (South Goa), Suraj Vernekar, has annulled the executive council election of the United Tribal Association Alliance (UTAA) conducted on September 30, 2022, and directed that fresh elections be held for the 2025–2028 triennial term.
In his order, Vernekar observed that UTAA functions as an alliance of eight associations. While disposing of complaints filed by a group that included the Gawada, Kunbi, Velip and Dhangar Federation, the All Goa Scheduled Tribes Union and the Tribal Welfare Organisation, he further recommended to the government that an Administrator be appointed under Section 20AA of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (Goa Amendment Act, 2023).
The appointed Administrator will be tasked with conducting fresh elections within 90 days from the date of appointment. The election process must strictly adhere to the society’s by-laws, the order states.
Additionally, the Administrator will be required to issue a 30 clear days’ notice to all eight constituent associations to convene a special general council meeting for electing a new executive council for the upcoming term.
The complaints, dated June 9, 2025, had sought a declaration invalidating the 2022 executive council, its cancellation, and a permanent injunction. In his findings, Vernekar noted that the respondents — Prakash Velip, Durgadas Gaude and Nanu Bandolkar — failed to effectively counter the allegations.
He pointed out that had proper notice been served to all members, documentary proof would have been produced. The absence of such evidence, he held, demonstrated non-compliance with the mandatory requirement of issuing 30 clear days’ notice. On this basis alone, he ruled that the 2022 election could not stand.
The complainants had maintained that no annual general body meeting was actually convened on September 30, 2022, to elect a new executive council. They also contended that they were never served the statutory notice required to call such a meeting.
In response, the three respondents argued that the complaint itself was not maintainable under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. They further asserted that despite being termed an alliance, UTAA was constituted by individual members, as evidenced by the 14 founding signatories who subscribed to its formation in their personal capacity rather than as representatives of their respective organisations.
