Point of Law: Terms of the requirement of Section 13 of the Societies Registration Act, no approval is required from the Sub-Registrar and any dispute among the governing body members or the members of the Society.

JUDGMENT :

1. Sri Ashwani Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for petitioners, Sri Vijay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent nos. 5 and 6.

2. Petitioners have filed this petition challenging the order annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition, whereby petitioners who are working as Assistant Teachers in primary school have been requisitioned to work as booth level officer (BLO).

3. Learned counsel for petitioners has placed reliance on decision of co-ordinate Benches in case of Charu Gaur and 2 others vs. State of U.P. and 6 others (Writ -A No. 6975 of 2021) so also in case of Madan Gopal and 8 others vs. State of U.P. and 6 others (Writ -A No. 17884 of 2019), and placing reliance on these decisions, it is submitted that in terms of the prohibition under Section 27 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 2009"), prohibits the District Magistrate and District Basic Education Officers to depute Assistant Teachers for works in violation of Section 27 of the Act of 2009, thus petitioners' engagement as BLO be set aside.

4. Petitioners have also placed reliance on the decision of Division Bench of this Court in case of Sunita Sharma Advocate High Court & Another vs. State of U.P. & 3 others, passed in PIL No. 11028 of 2015, where services of the petitioners were requisitioned for the purpose of work of verification of ration cards, where Division Bench of this Court allowed the writ petition and directed the District Administration to not to requisition the services of teachers in Primary Schools and Junior High Schools for carrying out such work, which is without the authority of law.

5. Similarly, reliance is placed on the decision of a co-ordinate Bench in U.P. Pradeshiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Banda and another vs. State of U.P. and 3 others (Writ -A No. 34082 of 2017) decided on 2.8.2017, where teachers were directed to undertake the exercise of verification of ration cards and the list of Antyodaya, BPL Card-holders under the provisions of National Food Security Act and High Court was pleased to quash the proceedings.

6. This aspect has already been considered by this Court while deciding Writ -A No. 12187 of 2021, decided on 1.10.2021, wherein this Court considered the law laid down in case of Sunita Sharma (supra) and also the provisions contained in Section 27 of the Act of 2009, inasmuch as Section 27 of Act of 2009 provides as under :

"27. Prohibition of deployment of teachers for non-educational purposes.-No teacher shall be deployed for any non-educational purposes other than the decennial population census, disaster relief duties or duties relating to elections to the local authority or the State Legislatures or Parliament, as the case may be."

7. Rule 21(3) of the U.P. Rules, 2011 (Special Rule) reads in the following terms:

"21(3). For the purpose of maintaining the pupil-teacher ratio, no teacher posted in a school shall be made to serve in any other school or office or deployed for any non-educational purpose, other than the decennial population census, disaster relief duties or duties relating to elections to the local authority or the State Legislatures or Parliament."

8. Whereas the order dated 3.11.2010 passed by the Election Commission of India provides that BLOs can be appointed only amongst the list mentioned below in addition to teachers who can be appointed as BLO :-

(i) Anganwadi workers,

(ii) Patwari/Amin/Lekhpal,

(iii) Panchayat Secretary,

(iv) Village Level Workers,

(v) Electricity Bill Readers,

(vi) Postman,

(vii) Auxiliary Nurses & Mid-wives,

(viii) Health workers,

(ix) Mid-day meal workers,

(x) Contract teachers,

(xi) Corporation Tax Collectors,

(xii) Clerical Staff in Urban area (UDC/LDC etc.)

9. This order dated 3.11.2010 passed by Election Commission of India will be of no assistance to the present petitioners, as teachers are included.

10. As far as the provisions contained in Section 27 of the Act of 2009 is concerned, it prohibits deploym