Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—An order dated 27.8.2011 passed by the Assistant Registrar (Firms, Societies and Chits), Moradabad under Section 25(2) of the Societies Registration Act, 1908 (hereafter referred to as the Act) has been impugned by the petitioner in this writ petition as also the consequential election programme dated 30.8.2011 issued by the respondent No. 8.

2. The Assistant Registrar by the impugned order inter alia holds that the term of the Managing Committee of the Society is to be treated as one year and as its elections have not been held within time the Managing Committee has become time barred. He accordingly directed for convening a meeting of the General Body of the Society for the purpose of elections.

3. In assailing the above order the primary contention of Sri Manish Goyal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the impugned order passed by the Assistant Registrar is completely without jurisdiction. The bye laws of the society do not prescribe for the elections of the Managing Committee to be held every year and therefore, the Assistant Registrar manifestly erred in treating the term of the Managing Committee to be one year and for directing the elections to be held accordingly.

4. In addition to the above primary contention raised on behalf of the petitioner, it has been contended that the order impugned has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and suffers from perversity.

5. In response to the above argument, Sri Gagendra Pratap, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Hemendra Kumar appearing for respondent Nos. 3 to 7 submits that the bye laws of the Society provides for the election of the Managing Committee which means that the members of the Managing Committee and its office bearers have to be elected. The concept of election itself postulates holding of elections periodically therefore, even if the bye laws are silent on the term of the Managing Committee in view of Section 4(1) of the Act, as the list of members is to be submitted annually, the Assistant Registrar has not erred in treating the term of the Managing Committee to be of one year.

6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the only question which falls for consideration in this writ petition is whether in the absence of any stipulation under the registered bye laws of the Society regarding the tenure of the Managing Committee, the Assistant Registrar was justified in treating the term of the Managing Committee to be one year only and in holding it to be time barred for the purposes of fresh elections of the Managing Committee.

7. Before dealing with the respective arguments of the parties, it is important to place on record the brief facts leading to the establishment of the Society and its bye laws.

8. It appears that one Brij Mohan Saran Agarwal and Anand Swaroop (Manav) together by a deed of trust dated 17.10.01 established a trust known as Sri Gangaram Shiksha Dharamarth Nyaas which inter alia provides that the trust will have a minimum of 2 and maximum of 12 trustees and that in case of vacancy of any trustee the same shall be filled up by the remaining trustees.

9. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid trust in addition to the two founder trustees aforesaid had 11 other trustees that is a total of 13 trustees.

10. The aforesaid trust established a Society known as Sri Gangaram Shiksha Samiti. The said society and its bye laws were registered under the Act on 5.4.2002. The bye laws of the Society have been filed as annexure-2 to the petition.

11. There is no dispute that all the 13 trustees of the trust constituted the General Body of the Society.

12. The registered bye laws provide for the constitution of the Managing Committee of 8 members including 5 office bearers to be elected by the General Body of the Society.

13. There is no dispute between the parties that the registered bye laws of the Society nowhere provides for the term of the Managing Committee of the Soc