Hon’ble Rajes Kumar, J.—By means of present petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.10.2005 passed by the Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, U.P., Lucknow by which he has given the approval to the committee in which Sri Surjit Singh was elected as Manager.

2. Heard Sri Rahul Jain, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Suresh Chandra Dwivedi, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party Nos. 4 and 5.

3. The contention of the Counsel for the petitioner is that before the Registrar rival claims were made by the petitioner for the approval of his Committee of Management and by the respondent Nos. 4 and 5. He submitted that the petitioner claimed that Sri Om Prakash Yadav was elected as Manager and Dr. Raja Ram Jha was elected as President in an election held on 1.9.2004. Sri Surjit Singh claimed that he was elected as Manager and Sri Shree Krishna Shakya was elected as President in an election held on 5.9.2004. The necessary documents were produced from both the sides. He submitted that in paragraph-18 of the counter affidavit, the Assistant Registrar has admitted the claim of the petitioner about the proceeding held on 1.9.2004 as correct. He submitted that since there was a dispute of the election and office bearers by the two rival committees, the Assistant Registrar has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the issue and should have referred the matter to the Prescribed Authority for adjudication under Section 25 (1) of the Societies Registration Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

4. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decisions of this Court in the case of Karhal Education Society, Karhal, District Mainpuri and others v. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra and others, (2006) 3 UPLBEC 2271; Mahipal Singh v. State of U.P., Through Secretary D.O.I.F. Government of U.P., Lucknow and others, 2005 (61) ALR 223 and Committee of Management, Harijan Gurukul Dohri Ghat, Mau and another, 2006 (63) ALR 862.

5. Sri S.C. Dwivedi, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the claim of the petitioner was not found correct and the claim of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 was found correct and, therefore, the same was approved. He further submitted that since the claim of the petitioner was not found correct, the Assistant Registrar has rightly decided the issue in exercise of power under Section 4 of the Act. He relied upon Division Bench decisions of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, Kisan Shiksha Sadan, Banksahi, District Basti and another v. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur and another, (1995) 2 UPLBEC 1242; and Committee of Management, Ashok Educational Society Gram Barpar (Araipar) and others v. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Gorakhpur and others, 2004 (4) E.S.C. 2444 (All.) and a decision of learned single Judge of this Court in the case of Sri Ram Laxmi Narain Marvadi Hindu Hospital, Godaulia, Varanasi and others v. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits and others, (2000) 3 UPLBEC 2063.

6. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, I have perused the impugned order and counter and rejoinder affidavits.

7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has made a claim that in a proceeding of election held on 1.9.2004, a Committee of Management was formed in which Sri Om Prakash Yadav was elected as Prabandhak and Dr. Raja Ram Jha was elected as President. In this view of the matter, there were rival claims of two Committee of Managements for approval before the Assistant Registrar. This Court has consistently held in the cases referred herein above, namely Karhal Education Society, Karhal, District Mainpuri and others v. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra and others, (2006) 3 UPLBEC 2271; Mahipal Singh v. State of U.P., Through Secretary D.O.I.F. Government of U.P., Lucknow and others, 2005 (61) ALR 223; and Committee of Management, Harijan Gurukul Doh