Point of Law : Appellants being covered by the phrase "parties concerned" as used by the learned Single Judge have full rights to appear before the said authority and furnish all its documents and evidence in order to establish their membership which shall be considered by the authority concerned.

ORDER :

JASPREET SINGH, J.

1. More often that not the Courts are faced with the dilemma over the breach of Rules of natural justice and the Court's discretion to refuse relief, even though Rules of natural justice have been breached, on the ground that no real prejudice is caused to the affected party. This is the core issue involved in the instant intracourt appeal.

2. Shri Sharad Pathak, learned counsel for the appellants has moved Civil Misc. Application No.165247 of 2021 seeking leave to prefer this intra court appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 08.10.2021 in Writ Petition No.36672 (M/S) of 2018 on the ground that an issue regarding the validity of the membership of Shri Saraswati Vidyalaya Samiti was before the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chit, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as "Deputy Registrar"), who after hearing the matter, passed an order dated 07.12.2018 upholding the list of the members of the society which included the names of the present appellants.

3. This order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the Deputy Registrar was challenged by Shri Ajit Kumar Jaiswal in his individual capacity in Writ Petition No.36672 (M/S) of 2018. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, allowed the writ petition by means of the impugned order dated 08.10.2021, as a result, the membership of the appellants which was upheld by the Deputy Registrar, has been set aside and this has caused prejudice as the learned Single Judge passed the order without affording any opportunity of hearing to the appellants and they were not even impleaded as parties in the writ petition and thus, the impugned order has been passed behind the back of the appellants. Since, the appellants were not parties to the writ petition and they are aggrieved by the impugned order, hence, the leave to appeal is being sought.

4. The leave to appeal is granted and the Court has proceeded to hear the learned counsel for the parties on merits of the appeal.

5. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that they are bonafide members of the Society namely Shri Saraswati Vidyalaya Samiti, Khiro, Raebareli. They had deposited their requisite membership fee and are entitled to exercise their membership rights including to participate in the elections of Committee of Management.

6. It is urged that election of the Society was held by the private-respondents with only 22 Members whereas the appellants were conveniently ignored and not permitted to participate and in the aforesaid backdrop the said elections were challenged.

7. The matter was considered by the Deputy Registrar and vide order dated 07.12.2018, 22 Members which were inducted by Shri Udai Bhan Mishra were found to be bonafide members and it was held that the list of General Body for the year 2018-19 presented by Shri Ajit Kumar Jaiswal was got fraudulently registered on the basis of improper and manufactured documents.

8. It is further urged that the said order dated 07.12.2018 passed by the Deputy Registrar was assailed by Ajit Kumar Jaiswal in his individual capacity before this Court in Writ Petition No.36672 (M/S) of 2018. Two other writ petitions bearing Writ Petition No.8273 (M/S) of 2019, titled as "Committee of Management, Sri Saraswati Vidyalaya Samiti v. State of U.P. and others", and Writ Petition No.12551 (M/S) of 2021, titled as "Udai Bhan Mishra v. State of U.P. and others", were also connected and all the three writ petitions were disposed by means of the impugned order dated 08.10.2021 and the entire matter of membership has been remitted to the Deputy Registrar to be decided afresh and this order has caused prejudice as the same has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellants.

9. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the appellants has relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in Institute of Chartered Accountant of India v. L.K. Ra