Back
2017 Supreme(All) 2641
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, J.
Al Huda Muslim Educational Society Thru Pres. Athar Husain - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P Thru Prin Secy Institutional Finance Lko & Ors - Respondent
Misc. Single No. 14542 of 2017
Decided on : 09-08-2017
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Zafar Yab Jilani, Najam Zafar
For the Respondent: C.S.C, A.M. Faridi, Savitra Vardhan Singh
Resolution of election disputes under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act is a prerequisite for the registration of the executive body members under Section 4 of the Act.
Headnote:
Election Dispute - Society Bye-laws - Societies Registration Act - Section 8, Section 10, Section 25(1)
Fact of the Case:
The petition challenges the validity of an order recognizing the election of the executive body of a society. The petitioners argue that the election was not conducted in accordance with the society's bye-laws and that the Deputy Registrar failed to consider the bye-laws before passing the order.
Finding of the Court:
The court finds that the dispute relates to the election of the executive body of the society and that without resolution of such dispute, the registration of the elected members could not have been done. The court quashes the impugned order and directs the Deputy Registrar to make a reference to the Prescribed Authority under Section 25(1) of the Act.
Issues: Validity of the election of the executive body, compliance with society bye-laws, authority of the Deputy Registrar to pass the impugned order.
Ratio Decidendi: The resolution of election disputes under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act is a prerequisite for the registration of the executive body members under Section 4 of the Act.
Final Decision: The petition is allowed, the impugned order is quashed, and the Deputy Registrar is directed to make a reference to the Prescribed Authority under Section 25(1) of the Act. An administrator is appointed to manage the affairs of the society during the interregnum period.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Savitra Vardhan Singh, learned counsel representing respondent nos.3 and 4.
2. This petition by eight individuals challenges the validity of an order dated 24.06.2017 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms Societies an Chits, Lucknow Region, Lucknow whereby the election of the executive body of the society known as ‘Al-Huda Muslim Educational Society, U.P. Triveni Nagar-III Near Sitapur Road, Lucknow’ has been recognized and the list of members of the executive body of the said society for the year 2017-18 has been registered/taken on record.
3. Lengthy arguments have been advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners to impeach the impugned order stating therein that the Deputy Registrar has completely failed to consider the bye-laws of the society, according to which, first of all the executive committee is to be constituted in terms of Section 8 of bye-laws and it is only thereafter that the office bearers of the executive body can be elected in terms of the provisions contained in Section 10 of the bye-laws of the society. It has further been argued that primarily the contention raised by the petitioners before the Deputy Registrar was that election of the office bearers has not been held in terms of the bye-laws of the society, hence it was a dispute relating to election of the members of the executive body of the society, as such without there being any resolution of the election dispute as provided under Section 25 (1) of the Societies Registration Act, the Deputy Registrar could not have passed the impugned order registering the list of office bearers of the society purportedly under Section 4 of the Act.
4. In support of his argument, learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon a judgment of this Court passed by a Division Bench in the Special Appeal Defective No.1286 of 2013; Committee of Management Anjuman Kherul Almin Allahabad and another vs. State of U.P. and others, decided on 18.12.2013.
5. Learned counsel representing the respondent nos.3 and 4 has vehemently opposed the petition and has submitted that in fact the petitioners do not have any locus in their individual capacity to challenge the impugned order. He has further stated that the election of the office bearers of the society has been conducted in accordance with law, as such the petitioners for that matter cannot have any grievance against the impugned order. He has also stated that the election of the office bearers held on 11.05.2017, on the basis of which, the impugned order dated 24.06.2017 has been passed, was never opposed or objected to by the petitioners and hence, at this stage they cannot be permitted to challenge the same.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order dated 24.06.2017, what unambiguously transpires is that it was a dispute relating to election of the members of the executive body of the society which arose before the Deputy Registrar and without resolution of such dispute relating to election, the registration of the allegedly elected members of the executive body of the society could not have been done.
7. Submission made by learned counsel for the respondent nos.3 and 4 that since the petitioners had not objected to election dated 11.05.2017, as such they cannot maintain this petition, in my considered opinion, does not hold the ground for the reason that the impugned order dated 24.06.2017 itself recites that Shuaib Ahsan Usmani-petitioner no.5 and Dr. Shakil Ahmad-petitioner no.3 were present at the time of hearing of the matter before the Deputy Registrar. Even otherwise, as soon as any dispute relating to election or continuance in office of an office bearers arises, the Deputy Registrar has to refer the dispute for its resolution before the Prescribed Authority as provided under Section 25 (1) of the Societies Registration Act. It is only after resolution of such elect
