Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J.—The present writ petition has been filed by four members of the High Court Bar Association (hereinafter referred to as the Association) praying for the quashing of the order dated 10th February, 2009, passed by the Assistant Registrar, Societies, Firms and Chits, Allahabad, by which new byelaws/rules of the Association has been registered under Section 4-A of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The petitioners have also prayed that a mandamus be issued to the office bearers of the Bar Association to run the affairs of the Association in accordance with the previous byelaws which were existing prior to the issuance of the impugned order. The petitioners have further prayed for any other writ, order or direction which the Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2. At the very outset, it was stated by Shri R.K. Ojha as well as by Shri Rishi Kant Rai, the learned counsels for the petitioners that the writ petition may be disposed of finally at the admission stage itself and that the Court may decide the issue finally and that the matter may not be relegated again to the Assistant Registrar who has passed the impugned order. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that time is the essence and that the matter may be decided at the earliest inasmuch as the office bearers have proposed to hold the election of the Association on 9th of October, 2009 and that the result of the writ petition would have a direct bearing on the election which are going to be held in the near future.

3. Shri V.C. Mishra, the learned Senior Counsel and President of the Bar Association and Shri T.P. Singh, the learned Senior Counsel have appeared on behalf of the Bar Association, and other office bearers of the Association and submitted that they have no problem if the Court decides the matter finally. Accordingly, as agreed between the parties, and without calling for a counter affidavit, and since the original records of the Registrar of Societies and two registers and one file containing the minutes of the Bar Association, have been produced by the Bar Association, this Court is proceeding to decide the matter finally.

4. The petitioners are the members of the Bar Association. The petitioner No. 1 is the Ex Joint Secretary and petitioner No. 2 is the Vice President of the present set of office bearers of the Association. Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 are members of the Bar Association. All the four petitioners are aspiring to hold a post in the ensuing election of the Association. The present controversy triggers from an order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Harbansh Singh and others v. State of U.P. and others in Writ Petition No. 40101 of 2007. The petitioners in that petition had prayed that the Assistant Registrar Societies be directed to ensure that the election of the High Court Bar Association be held within a stipulated period after preparing the voter list in accordance with the model byelaws or the byelaws of the Society. The petitioners had also prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh to ensure compliance of their model byelaws by the High Court Bar Association. In this writ petition, the Court passed a set of directions on various dates. On 29th August, 2007, the Court directed the Bar Association to hold a meeting of the general body of the Association for consideration of the model byelaws. For facility, the order dated 29th August, 2007 is quoted hereunder :

“Heard Shri T.P. Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners. At this stage we are concerned as to whether the election of the Allahabad High Court Bar Association be conducted as per the model byelaws framed by the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh. Such an issue can be decided by the general body of the High Court Bar Association, as it requires amendment of the existing byelaws. For that purpose, the parties have agreed that the meeting of the general body, High Cour