Hon’ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State and Sri H.G.S.Parihar, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri G.M. Kamil, learned counsel for respondent No. 4.

2. A preliminary objection has been filed by respondent No. 4 as to the maintainability of the writ petition stating therein that since petitioner No. 2 is neither Manager nor Secretary of the committee of management of the society, as such he could not file this petition alleging himself to be the Secretary of the committee of management of the society. It has also been stated that no valid resolution of the committee of management of the society has been filed authorizing the petitioner No. 2 to file this petition thus on these grounds, the petition is liable to be dismissed.

3. So far as the locus of the petitioner No. 1 to institute these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution is concerned, the same will have no relevance for the reason that basic dispute raised by the petitioner No. 2 is in respect of acceptance of his alleged resignation. The resignation accepted and acted upon by the society which has been recognized by the Deputy Registrar is the issue raised, hence the petitioner No. 2 is entitled to institute this petition.

4. The objection regarding maintainability raised by learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 is, thus, overruled.

5. Since this Court in the judgement to follow does not propose to adjudicate upon any factual aspect of the matter and the legal issue as to the jurisdiction of the Registrar/Deputy Registrar under Section 4 read with Section 25 (1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘’Act’) is to be considered, hence for deciding such an issue, no counter-affidavit would be required. To this proposition, learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent No. 4 do not object.

6. The petitioner No. 2 indisputedly was working as Manager of the society known as “Darul Uloom Ahle Sunnat Gulshane Tayaba Bantheehwa Bhinga, District Shrawasti”. On an application preferred by the petitioner dated 2.7.2015 containing the list of office bearers of the committee of management of the society for the year 2015-16, the same was registered/admitted by the Deputy Registrar, Faizabad Division, Faizabad vide his order dated 9.7.2015, which has been annexed at page 39 of the writ petition as part of annexure No. 3. In the said list admitted by the Deputy Registrar on 9.7.2015, the petitioner is shown to be the Manager.

7. The controversy, however, arose on the alleged resignation dated 6.7.2015 said to have been submitted by the petitioner to the President of the society, a copy of which has been annexed at page 38 of the writ petition. The general body of the society is said to have met on 12.7.2015 after the alleged resignation submitted by the petitioner on 6.7.2015 and in his place one Sri Kamruddin Khan-respondent No. 4 is said to have been elected. The said resolution dated 12.7.2015 recites that rest of the members of the committee of management shall remain that would mean that Sri Kamruddin Khan-respondent No. 4 was elected for the remainder period of the term of committee of management. The respondent No. 4 thereafter appears to have written a letter on 27.7.2015 informing the Deputy Registrar, Faizabad Division, Faizabad about the proceedings of the meetings of the general body of the society alleged to have been held on 12.7.2015 and on this said basis a new list of the committee of management of the society for the year 2015-16 was presented.

8. At this juncture, it is noticeable that merely a month ago i.e. 9.7.2015, a different list of the committee of management which comprised of the petitioner as Manager was admitted by the Deputy Registrar and as such at the time of admitting the list submitted by the respondent No. 4 by means of the order dated 5.8.2015, the Deputy Registrar ought to have been cautious