Hon’ble Rajan Roy, J.—Heard Sri Raghvendra Singh senior counsel assisted by Sri Anurag Kumar Singh for the petitioner, Dr. L. P. Mishra, Advocate assisted by Sri Sharad Pathak, for opposite party No. 5, Sri S. K. Kalia Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Samir Kalia for opposite party No. 6, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for opposite parties 1 to 3 and Sri Ramesh Pandey for opposite party No. 4.

2. By means of this writ petition the petitioner claiming himself to be a member of the society known as Uttar Pradeshiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh (hereinafter referred to as the society) has assailed the order dated 16.5.2015 passed by the Prescribed Authority/S.D.M. Sadar, Lucknow under Section 25 (1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 in Case No. 11 of 2015 (Jabar Singh Yadav v. Hari Singh and others).

3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that there is a society of teachers, as named hereinabove. The elections to the committee of management of the said society were held on 29.10.2012. This fact has been asserted in para 7 of the writ petition and has not been denied, rather it has been admitted in para 8 of the counter-affidavit of opposite party No. 5 though according to opposite party No. 5, subsequently another election has been held on 23.5.2015. The other opposite parties have also not denied this fact.

4. In the elections held on 29.10.2012 the opposite party No. 5 was elected as President and opposite party No. 6 as General Secretary of the society. It appears that the said opposite parties were at logger heads with each other and certain resolutions were passed by the committee of management or the general body of the society, as the case may be, ousting them from the committee of management. These resolutions were passed at the behest of rival factions, one led by Lallan Misra (opposite party No. 5) and the other led by Jabar Singh (opposite party No. 6). Ultimately the matter went up to the Deputy Registrar who referred the dispute pertaining to office bearers of the committee of management of the society to the Prescribed Authority vide his letter dated 7.10.2014.

5. In the meantime the petitioner herein filed a writ petition before this Court bearing Writ Petition No. 8195 (MB) of 2013 seeking a writ of quo warranto against opposite party No. 5 herein as according to him the said opposite party had been convicted for a criminal offence under Section 302 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code in the year 1984 and, therefore, in view of the provisions of Section 16-A of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the Act 1860) he was not legally entitled to hold the office of President of the society, more so, as he had obtained appointment as a teacher by concealing the aforesaid conviction. This Court disposed of the aforesaid writ petition on 26.11.2013 holding the same to be not maintainable but leaving it open for the petitioner to make appropriate application in accordance with the provisions contained in the Societies Registration Act, 1860 in such matters. The petitioner is said to have moved the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Chits and Societies, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as Deputy Registrar) in this regard. However, as no order was passed on his application by the Deputy Registrar, he filed another writ petition bearing Writ Petition No. 2400 (MS) of 2014 which was disposed of vide order dated 20.8.2014 passed by this Court with a direction to the Deputy Registrar to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner’s representation. The petitioner is said to have moved a representation before the Deputy Registrar on 23.8.2014 in pursuance to the aforesaid direction of this Court whereupon the Deputy Registrar passed an order dated 2.9.2014 directing the committee of management of the society to take action in accordance with law.

6. In the meantime, according to the petitioner, the committee of management passed a resolution on 14.7.2013 to remove opposite party No. 5 from the p