The central legal point established in the judgment is that the Registrar/Administrator does not have the authority to enroll new members and must conduct elections based on the list of members existing on the date of supersession.

Sunil Kumar Sinha, J. :-

1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 4th of December, 2010 passed in W.P.(C) No. 4882/2010 by the learned Single Judge of this Court.

2. The facts, briefly stated, are as under:-

Appellant No.1 is a registered society, incorporated under M.P. (C.G.) Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973. After its supersession on 15.05.2006, Collector Raipur was appointed as Administrator, who joined on 17.05.2006. Thereafter, respondent No.2 was appointed Administrator on 14.05.2008. Earlier, two writ petitions namely W.P.(C) No 6290/2008 (Gokut Das Daga Vs. State of C.G. & Others) and W.P. (C) No. 313312009 (Bat Ashram & Another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) were filed and were disposed of by a common order dated 22nd of July, 2010. The operative part of the common order contained in paras 4 & 5 read as under :

"4. In view of the above, it is directed that the new administrator or the Registrar himself may ensure holding of elections as early as possible on the basis of members enrolled earlier prior to the appointment of new administrator, as early as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the aforesaid direction and observation, both the writ petitions are disposed of."

The subsequent writ petition i.e. W.P.(C) No. 4882/2010 was filed by the appellants on the ground that the said authorities incorporated new members subsequent to the order of supersession and appointment of administrator, i.e. 15.05.2006 and they wanted to convene the election on the basis of new membership list, which was not in accordance with law and was also in violation of order dated 22.07.2010 passed in above writ petitions. At the time of hearing of W.P.(C) No. 4882/2010, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that they are complying with the order dated 22.07.2010 in its letter and spirit for holding election on the basis of members enrolled earlier prior to the appointment of new administrator. On the said statement made by the counsel for the respondents, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition reserving the liberty to the appellants to take recourse to proper forum, if the order dated 22.07.2010 passed in Gokul Das Daga (Supra) and other connected matter is not complied with in its letter and spirit.

3. Mr. Gautam Bhaduri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, argued that the authorities of the State were trying to hold the election on the basis of new members enrolled after the supersession sufficient material was brought to the notice of the Single Judge in this regard; therefore, the learned Single Judge, ought to have clarified in the order the legal petition and would have directed in express words that the election would be convened on the basis of members who were enrolled on the date of super session of the society and not on the basis of members enrolled thereafter. Mr. Bhaduri submitted that the Registrar/Administrator cannot enroll new members, therefore, the action relating to enrollment of new members was ab-initio void and election cannot be convene on the basis of newly enrolled members. He placed reliance on 2 decisions i.e. K. Shantharaj & another Vs. ML. Nagaraja & Others; and Sujit Kumar Banerjee Vs. State of MP. & Others.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the interveners/newly enrolled members, opposed these arguments and contend that Registrar/Administrator has full authority to enroll new members and the election should be convened on the basis of voter list prepared after enrollment of new members by the administrator as per Section 33(4) of the Act, 1973.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also perused the records of the writ appeal as also the writ petition.

6. The learned Single Judge has already directed that the election shall be convened on the basis of members enrolled earlier, prior to the appointment of the new administrator, therefore, no