Hon’ble Ashok Bhushan, J.—Heard Sri G.K. Singh and Sri Bheem Singh, learned counsels for the appellant, Sri Vinod Sinha, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 4 and learned Standing Counsel.

By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the appeal has been heard and is being disposed of finally.

2. This appeal under Chapter-VIII, Rule 5 of the Rules of the Court has been filed against the judgment and order dated 19th October, 2010 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge dismissing the writ petition of respondent No. 4. While dismissing the writ petition Hon’ble Single Judge has issued certain directions which are impugned in this appeal.

3. Brief facts of the case, necessary to be noted for deciding the appeal, are; Arya Kanya Pathshala Association Khurja, District Bulandshahr is a registered society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The said society runs an institution, namely, Arya Kanya Pathshala Inter College, Khurja, which has been recognised under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and is receiving aid from the State Government. The institution is run by an approved scheme of administration. The earlier election of the Committee of Management was held on 18th February, 2005. Thereafter the election took place on 24th January, 2010. The District Inspector of Schools vide his order dated 27th January, 2010 attested the signatures of Dr. Dheeraj Singh as Manager of the Committee of Management. The respondent No. 4 claiming to be a life member of the society filed the writ petition praying for quashing the order dated 27th January, 2010. A writ of mandamus was also claimed directing the Regional Level Committee and the District Inspector of Schools to decide the representations dated 10th May, 2010 and 2nd September, 2010. The writ petition was heard by the Hon’ble Single Judge on 19th October, 2010. An objection was raised by the counsel for the respondent (appellant herein) that the writ petition is not maintainable having been filed by the writ petitioner claiming to be member of the general body. Hon’ble Single Judge dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable. However, while dismissing the writ petition, Hon’ble Single Judge made following observations :

“The Regional Level Committee may consider the grievance of the petitioner according to law, if possible, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of the order. As informed by the respondent, Deputy Director, who is one of the member of the Regional Level Committee, is in relation of the petitioner. If that is so, then another Regional Level Committee minus that particular Deputy Director may decide the issue.”

4. The appellant by this appeal has prayed for setting aside the order of Hon’ble Single Judge insofar as observation has been made by Hon’ble Single Judge that Regional Level Committee may consider the grievance of respondent No. 4 according to law, if possible, within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order.

5. Sri G.K. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, challenging the part of the order, as indicated above, submits that when the Hon’ble Single Judge accepted the preliminary objection of respondent-appellant that the writ petition having been filed by a member of the general body was not maintainable, there was no occasion for issuing any direction for deciding the grievance of respondent No. 4. Sri Singh has further contended that an individual member of the general body had no right to raise a dispute before the Regional Level Committee since no rival election has been claimed by the writ petitioner. It is further submitted that, in fact, respondent No. 4, who had filed the writ petition, is not even a member of the general body of the society which issue has already been decided by order dated 30th November, 2009 passed by the Prescribed Authority under Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. It is submitted that against