( 1 ) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution involves the scope of the power of the prescribed Authority to pass an interim order pending reference made to it under Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, hereafter, the Act.

( 2 ) THE facts are these : Meerut Collegiate Association, petitioner No. 1, is a society registered under the Act. The Society runs and administers the Meerut College, Meerut The affairs of the college are looked after by an Executive Committee of the Society consisting of 33 members, out of whom 21 members are elected. The term of the Executive Committee is for three years and the last election of the Executive Committee of the Society was held on 19th Feb. , 1978 under bye-law 12 (a) of the Society. Thereafter fresh elections were held on 10th May, 1981. In that election Sri Raja Ram Mittal was elected President, Sri P. S. Rastogi Vice-President and Sri J. D. Singhal, Petitioner No. 2 the Honorary Secretary. Twenty-one members of the Executive committee as well were elected. Sri Arvind Nath Seth, respondent No. 1 and Sri Vishwa Nath agarwal, respondent No. 2, were also candidates for the posts of President and Honorary secretary respectively. Both of them lost the election. Soon after these respondents along with some others made a reference under Section 25 of the Act seeking to challenge the election of the aforesaid office bearers and members of the Executive Committee before the Sub-Divisional magistrate, Meerut, respondent No. 3, on 13th May, 1981 being Case No. 2/12 of 1981. The petitioners put in appearance and filed preliminary objections. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate who has also been personally made party as respondent No. 4 during the course of these proceedings, passed an interlocutory order on 10th of June, 1981 directing that pending the reference, the meeting of the Executive Committee fixed for that day and in future shall not be held till further orders. This order forms the subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition.

( 3 ) COUNTER and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged.

( 4 ) THE question which falls for our consideration thus is as to whether in proceedings under section 25 of the Act the Prescribed Authority can pass an interlocutory or interim order. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the Prescribed Authority is not competent to pass any interim order pending the reference because there is no such power conferred on it either expressly or by implication under the relevant provisions of the Act. He invited our attention to a number of decisions in his support. On the contrary Sri S. S. Bhatnagar, learned counsel for the respondents, urged that in the first instance Section 25 of the Act itself confers a power on the Prescribed Authority to pass such an order. Apart from this in view of Section 19-A of the U. P. General Clauses Act there is now no difficulty in spelling out on inherent power in the Prescribed Authority to make an interim order. According to Sri Bhatnagar when a power is conferred on a statutory authority, unless there is any restriction or limitation provided, the authority shall have all the powers to do such acts as are reasonably necessary for the execution of the power conferred. He also cited some decisions in support of his contentions.

( 5 ) WE shall first see whether Section 25 of the Act confers any such power on the Prescribed authority expressly or by implication. Sub-section (1) of Section 25 as introduced in the Act by the State of Uttar Pradesh reads :

"25. Disputes regarding election of officebearers :-- (1) The Prescribed Authority may, on a reference made to it by the Registrar or by at least one-fourth of the members of Society registered in Uttar Pradesh, hear and decide in a summary manner any doubt or dispute in respect of the election or continuance in office of an office bearer of such society and may pass such ordefs in respect thereof as it deems fit. " There is a p