By the Court.—This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the special appeal.

2. Since sufficient cause has been shown in the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

3. The condonation of delay application is allowed.

4. The special appeal arises from a judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 3 October 2013, declining to entertain a petition filed by the appellants under Article 226 of the Constitution on the ground that the appellants have a remedy of moving the Prescribed Authority under Section 25(1) of the Societies’ Registration Act, 1860. The appellants, claiming to be the Committee of Management of Anjuman Kherul Almin Allahganj and its Manager Mr. Abbash Khan sought to question the legality of an order dated 26 July 2013 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms Societies and Chits, Kanpur. By his order, the Deputy Registrar rejected the claim of the appellants and accepted the list of office bearers submitted by the third respondent for the year 2013 and issued consequential directions for registration of the list of office bearers under Section 4 of the Act. When the petition came up an objection was raised on behalf of the third respondent that the appellants can avail of a statutory alternative remedy under Section 25(1). This objection was accepted by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the petition.

5. The contention of the appellants is that the Deputy Registrar, who passed the order dated 26 July 2013 which was called into question before the learned Single Judge had no jurisdiction to entertain an election dispute about which of the rival claims was sustainable. Hence it has been submitted that when the list of office bearers is submitted to the Deputy Registrar under Section 4 and he finds that there is a dispute in regard to the validity of the elections set up by the rival contestants, the Deputy Registrar cannot decide that question but he has to make a reference to the Prescribed Authority under Section 25(1). In the present case it was submitted that the Deputy Registrar transgressed the limitation on his jurisdiction by going into the merits of the rival claims when he ought to have referred the dispute to the Prescribed Authority. In this regard reliance was placed on the judgments of two Division Benches of this Court in All-India Council through Bharat Dharam Maha Mandal, Bahura Bir Varanasi and another v. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Varanasi Region, Varanasi and another, 1988 AWC 1154 and in Gram Shiksha Sudhar Samiti Junior High School, Sikandra District Kanpur Dehat v. Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, U.P. Lucknow, 2010 (7) ADJ 643.

6. On the other hand it was urged on behalf of the third respondent that it has been held in a subsequent decision of the Division Bench in the Committee of Management, Adarsh Krishak Junior High School, Mauaima, Allahabad v. State of U.P. and others, 2009(5) ESC 3506, that the Deputy Registrar, when he is seized with a proceeding under Section 4 is not a “mere post office” who must refer any and every dispute. In the present case, it was urged that the third respondent had set up an election and a list had been submitted for 2013-14 the validity of which was within the jurisdiction of the Deputy Registrar to determine.

7. Under Section 4 of the Societies’ Registration Act, 1860, as amended in the State of U.P. the following provision has been made :

“4. (1) Annual list of managing body to be filed.—Once in every year, on or before the fourteenth day succeeding the day on which, according to the rules of the Society, the annual general meeting of the society is held, or, if the rules do not provide for an annual general meeting, in the month of January, a list shall be filed with the Registrar of the names, addresses and occupations of the governors, council, directors, committee, or other governing body then entrusted with the management of the affa