Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is unsuitable for resolving internal disputes or rival claims for leadership within a society. Such disputed questions of fact, requiring a comprehensive trial and the leading of evidence, must be adjudicated by a competent civil court rather than in summary writ proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

I.A. No.11656 of 2025

1. This interlocutory application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 22 days in preferring the instant appeal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. Considering the sufficient cause as has been referred in the interlocutory application, the delay of 22 days in preferring the appeal is hereby condoned.

4. Accordingly, I.A. No.11656 of 2025 stands allowed.

L.P.A. No.648 of 2025 Prayer

5. The instant appeal under Clause-10 of Letters Patent is directed against the order/judgment dated 25.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No.6620 of 2024, by which, the learned writ court has refused to interfere with the order dated 20.06.2024 passed by the respondent no.3 by dismissing the writ petition, however, directing the respondent 3. to refer the election dispute so raised by the petitioner to the Principal Court of original civil jurisdiction, where the petitioner’s society is situated.

Factual Matrix

6. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the memo of appeal, required to be enumerated, which read as under: -

7. It is the case of the appellant-writ petitioner that the Society was originally registered in State of Bihar in the year 1973 and after coming into existence of Jharkhand State, it has been re-registered on the same name and same by-laws of the Society registered in Bihar along with the same executive body and members from the office of Respondent no.3. The writ petitioner Society, after its registration, has elected its executive body on November, 2007 for a term of 5 years as per by-laws, i.e., up to November 2012. The same executive body has continued for a further term of 5 years, i.e., Nov. 2012 to Nov. 2017 unanimously. The death of certain office bearer during this term has necessitated the replacement which has been done accordingly as per by-laws from the existing members of the Society, that too unanimously.

8. It is the further case that the petitioner-Society is engaged in running Schools in the name of Indian School of Learning and has branches spread in far flung areas and for managing the School effectively and handling the day to day affairs of the School, the executive body of the Society has established local managing committee for such Schools and Bank Accounts were handed by such committee as per instruction and guidance of the Executive body.

9. During the intervening period the Society has to close one of its schools running in the premises of Indian School of Mines Dhanbad after expiry of the lease period. This School branch has, during its running has got furniture, Books and other School items and the school branch's Bank Account has deposit of about Rs.75 lakhs and after closer of the branch all these were to be handed over to the Executive body of the Society, but, the Secretary of the local Managing Committee of the School, who was also the Vice President of the Society Executive body, was not interested in doing so, has assembled a meeting, dated 20/03/2016, meeting of group of the local persons including the Respondent no.6 and in connivance with another Executive members of