The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's exercise of power under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution to appoint the Sub-Collector, Puri to conduct the election of the Executive Committee, based on the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, Rule 6, Rule 13(cha), and Election Rules, 1994.

JUDGMENT :

M.M. Das, J. - The petitioner claiming to be a registered society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (for short, 'the Act') has filed the aforesaid writ petition challenging the order dated 17.12.2010 passed by the learned District Judge, Puri in F.A.O. No. 120 of 2010.

2. The facts involved in this writ petition in short are that the petitioner is one of the 36 Nijogs of Shree Shree Jagannath Temple, Puri, known as Pratihari Nijog Annadana Bhog Committee. The said Nijog has been registered as a society under the Act having its own bye-law to govern its management and administration. The petitioner claims that as per the bye-law, the management of the Nijog is entrusted to a committee consisting of 17 members which was duly elected by the general body on 13.12.2006. While the matter stood thus, on 15.10.2008, 9 (nine) out of 17 members, resigned from the committee. Thereafter, three out of those nine withdrew their resignation. Therefore, the resigning members were only six in number, which did not affect the committee as per the bye-law. The petitioner has further contended that in terms of the provisions contained in the bye-law under Rule 6, sub-rule (una), the President has the power of nominating members of the Executive Committee as against the vacant seats. Accordingly, six members were nominated by the President. The opp. party-defendant, who is stated by the petitioner to be a suspended member of the Nijog, filed an application before the Registrar of the Societies, i.e., Additional District Magistrate, Puri with a prayer to withdraw the affiliation from the Governing Body/Committee of the Nijog. The opp. party challenged the nomination of the six members to the Executive Committee by the President. The Registrar of Societies passed an order as at Annexure-5 on 25.9.2010 declaring the entire Governing Body/Committee so framed is not in consonance with Rule 13(cha) of the bye-law and is not in force from 15.10.2008 and any action taken therefrom by the Committee is void ab initio and allowing the application filed by the opp. party by issuing a direction to hold fresh general election. The petitioner challenging the said order passed by the A.D.M.-cum-Registering authority of the society has filed Civil Suit No. 526 of 2010 before the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Puri. The opp. party, who is a defendant in the said suit after entering appearance, has filed a counter claim making a prayer for a decree to appoint an administrator to take charge of the management of the society to deal with the traditional Pratihari Seva of Lord Jagannath till a new committee is elected and takes charge of the management. The petitioner-plaintiff filed I.A. No.252 of 2010 praying for an interim injunction as against the order passed by the Registrar of Societies and the opp. party - defendant filed I.A. No. 268 of 2010 seeking a mandatory injunction for appointment of an administrator as claimed in the counter claim during pendency of the suit. After hearing the parties, the learned trial Court dismissed I.A. No. 252 of 2010 filed by the petitioner - plaintiff and allowed I.A. no. 268 of 2010. Challenging the order of dismissal of I.A. No. 252 of 2010, the petitioner has preferred FAO No. 121 of 2010 which is pending before the learned lower appellate Court. So far as the order passed in I.A. No. 268 of 2010 is concerned, where the learned trial Court directed both the parties to maintain status quo till fresh election is conducted by 17.12.2010, the petitioner - plaintiff challenged the said order filing FAO No. 120 of 2010 along with an application for stay of operation of the order passed by the learned trial Court. At the initial stage, by order dated 15.12.2010, the learned lower appellate Court directed stay of operation of the order dated 6.10.2010 passed in I.A. No. 268 of 2010. The opp. party entered appearance in the said appeal on 16.12.2010 and filed a cross objection with a petition to dismiss the inte