Allahabad High Court
C/M Kisan Intermediate College Samit ... vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 22 October, 2019
Author: Saral Srivastava
Bench: Saral Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 54 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 32382 of 2019 Petitioner :- C/M Kisan Intermediate College Samit Tirwa Kannauj And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogesh Kumar Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Nand Lal Pandey,Suyash Pandey Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Saxena, leanred counsel for the petitioners and Sri Nand Lal Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4.
By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 12.09.2019 passed by the Sub-divisional Magistrate/Prescribed Authority, Tirwa, Kannauj, whereby the Prescribed Authority has allowed the application submitted by the respondent no. 4 and cancelled the list of members submitted by petitioners duly registered for the session year 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15.
It appears that earlier with respect to the list of members of 2013-14, the dispute arose between the parties which had travelled to this Court in Writ- C No. 19927 of 2007 and Writ - C No. 56532 of 2010. Both the writ petitions were filed by the petitioner which were allowed by this Court vide judgement and order dated 07.09.2012.
On the basis of the judgement rendered by this Court, the list of the members submitted for the year 2012-13 was registered by the Assistant Registrar on 05.06.2014.
It appears that for the year 2014-15, the Deputy Registrar by order dated 22.07.2014 refused to register the list of members submitted by the respondent no. 3. A Writ Petition No. 22420 of 2015 was preferred by respondent no. 3 challenging the order dated 22.07.2014 in which this Court passed an interim order on 21.04.2015.
The petitioner being aggrieved by the interim order dated 21.04.2014 in Writ Petition No. 22420 of 2015 preferred a Special Appeal no. 291 of 2015 in which on concession given by the counsel for the respondent no. 4, this Court allowed the appeal with liberty to the respondent no. 4 to approach appropriate authority under Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860.
Respondent no. 4 in pursuance of the order passed by this Court in Special Appeal no. 291 of 2015 , submitted an objection to the election of petitioner before Prescribed Authority which was registered as Case No. 1663 of 2015.
The petitioner submitted objections to the application of the respondent no. 4 wherein a specific plea was raised by the petitioner that the application filed by the respondent no. 4 is not maintainable as it is not signed by 1/4th members of the society as 12 members who have singed the application are not members of the society.
During the course of pendency of the proceeding before the prescribed authority, the list submitted by the petitioner in respect of year 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 was registered and petitioner continued to work as Committee of Management of the society.
On the expiry of the Committee of Management, a fresh election of the society had taken place on 05.05.2019 in which again petitioner no. 2 has been elected as Manager of the society. This election of petitioners was duly approved by the Deputy Registrar by order dated 08.05.2019.
The prescribed authority by order dated 12.09.2019 annulled the registered list of the petitioners from the year 2012-13 and 2014-15 and further approved the list of the members submitted by the respondent no. 4 for the year 2014-15 and 2015-16.
Challenging the aforesaid order learned counsel for the petitioner contended that a specific objection with regard to maintainability of the application of the respondent no. 4 was raised inasmuch as out of 15 members who have singed application, 12 members were not actual members of the society. The second submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that the respondent no. 4 has prayed for approving the list of members submitted by him 2014-15 and 2015-16 and a fresh election has taken place which was duly approved by the Deputy Registrar. Thus, the relief prayed in the application under section 25 of the Act 1860 has become infractuous and could not be granted by the Prescribed Authority on 05.05.2019 .
From the impugned order it appears that though the prescribed authority has dealt with the issue with regard to maintainability of the petition by respondent no. 4, but the prescribed authority has not recorded any finding with respect to the validity of 12 members who have signed the petition and whose membership has been disputed by the petitioner as according to the petitioner, they are not the members of the society.
Further order dated 08.05.2019 approving the election of the petitioner held on 05.05.2019 has not been challenged neither before this Court nor before the prescribed authority.
Learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 fairly concedes that issue with regard to the maintainability of the petition has not been dealt correctly by the prescribed authority, and therefore in the facts of the present case the order impugned may be set aside.
In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the respondents, the order dated 12.09.2019 passed by respondent no. 2 Prescribed Authority is set aside and the matter is remanded back to Deputy Registrar to decide afresh. If the respondent no. 4, so desires, he may also challenge the election of petitioner held on 05.09.2019 in a proper forum available in law.
Order Date :- 22.10.2019 Sachin