Back
2025 Supreme(Jhk) 2285
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI, JJ.
Academic Quest through the Secretary Jitendra Kumar Singh, S/O Late Ram Dhani Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
L.P.A. No.648 of 2025
Decided on : 02-12-2025
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Writ Jurisdiction and Societies Law
Act Referred
GENERAL CLAUSES ACT: S.13, S.20, S.21, S.23
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA: Art.226
SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT: S.23
Bihar now Jharkhand Societies Registration Rules: R.12
Headnote
(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Scope and Ambit - Writ proceedings are summary in nature and unsuitable for determining disputed questions of fact like the legitimacy of rival office bearers - When opposing factions claim authority, such matters require leading evidence and are best relegated to a competent civil court of original jurisdiction. (Paras 54, 56)
Facts of the case:
Two rival factions within a registered society each claimed to be the lawfully elected leadership, specifically the secretary. The registration authority conducted an enquiry into complaints of mismanagement and regulatory non-compliance, issuing directions for statutory adherence while noting that the election dispute was outside its mandate. The writ court refused to interfere, directing the parties to seek adjudication through a civil court of original jurisdiction. This appeal assailed the writ court's refusal to intervene.
Findings of Court:
The court determined that the dispute was essentially private and centered on complex factual assertions regarding the legitimacy of elected office bearers. It was held that such issues cannot be resolved through summary writ proceedings and necessitate the examination of evidence, which is the domain of a civil court.
Issues: Whether a writ court is the appropriate forum to adjudicate rival claims regarding the lawful leadership and management of a registered society where disputed questions of fact are involved.
Ratio Decidendi: Disputed questions of fact concerning the control and internal election of office bearers in a society are not suitable for summary adjudication under writ jurisdiction. A litigant with a grievance of a civil nature must pursue their remedy before a competent civil court unless such jurisdiction is barred, thus ensuring proper trial and evidence evaluation.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
For the Appellant :Mr. Mahavir Pd. Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Suraj Prakash, Advocate
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of procedural history and underlying fact matrix regarding the society's election dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 2. rival contentions concerning the validity of society management and jurisdiction of writ courts. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 3. review of the inspector general's administrative decision and the scope of the writ court's oversight. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53) |
| 4. disputed questions of civil fact cannot be adjudicated via summary writ jurisdiction. (Para 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58) |
| 5. dismissal of appeal with liberty to approach the civil court. (Para 59 , 60) |
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
