Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SALIL KUMAR RAI, J.
C/M Gram Shiksha Samiti – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. And Others – Respondents
Writ C No.21981 of 2022
Decided on : 15-09-2022
Election Dispute - Society Management - Bye-laws of the Society - [Election Dispute] - [Society Management] - [No specific Act-Section referenced] - The court discussed the dispute over the validity of the elections and the expulsion of members from the Society. The Deputy Registrar rejected the petitioner's claim based on the lack of evidence of proper notice for the meeting, as required by the bye-laws of the Society. The court found that the absence of proper notice invalidated the meeting and the resolution passed, supporting the Deputy Registrar's decision. The court also dismissed the petitioner's argument regarding the irregularity in the proceedings, stating that it would not affect the final legal conclusion.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute over the validity of elections and the expulsion of members from a society. The petitioner challenged the rejection of their complaint by the Deputy Registrar.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the absence of proper notice for the meeting invalidated the resolution passed, supporting the Deputy Registrar's decision. The court also dismissed the petitioner's argument regarding the irregularity in the proceedings, stating that it would not affect the final legal conclusion.
Issues: Dispute over the validity of elections, expulsion of members, and the rejection of the petitioner's complaint by the Deputy Registrar.
Ratio Decidendi: The absence of proper notice for the meeting invalidated the resolution passed, supporting the Deputy Registrar's decision. The irregularity in the proceedings regarding the representation dated 3rd March, 2022 was dismissed by the court.
Final Decision: The petition lacked merit and was dismissed by the court. The petitioner was advised to seek any other available remedy in law.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, the counsel for the petitioner and Sri Bachchu Lal Yadav, the counsel for respondent no. 4.
2. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 8.4.2022 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra rejecting the complaint of the petitioner. The order dated 8.4.2022 has been passed after the matter was remanded back to the Deputy Registrar by this Court vide its order dated 18.3.2021 passed in Writ - C No. 7978 of 2021.
3. Both respondent no. 4 and Sri Vipin Kumar Chauhan, the petitioner, claim themselves to be the elected Manager of the Governing Body of Gram Shiksha Samiti, Kasimpur Power House, District Aligarh. The admitted facts are that the elections of the Society were previously held on 25th June, 2012 and the list of office bearers elected in the aforesaid elections was registered by the Registrar. The respondent no. 4 was elected as the Manager of the Committee of Management of the Society in the elections held on 25th June, 2012. Subsequently, in 2016, the respondent no. 4 submitted another list of office bearers for registration claiming that fresh elections were held on 22nd June, 2016. The records reveal that the said list was registered by the Registrar on 6th July, 2016. In 2017, Vipin Kumar Chauhan submitted a list of office bearers for registration, claiming that elections were held on 2nd January, 2017 in which he was elected as Manager of the Committee of Management of the Society. Vipin Kumar Chauhan claimed that the General Body of the Society, vide its resolution dated 29th May, 2016 had expelled Mahendra Singh Chauhan, Ravindra Singh Chauhan (respondent no. 4) and Lakhan Singh and had cancelled their membership of the Society. At this stage, it would be relevant to note that in the elections held in 2012, Lakhan Singh was elected as the President and one Santosh Kumar Raghav was elected as the Vice-President of the Society. The Deputy Registrar vide his order dated 11th December, 2020 rejected the list of office bearers submitted by Vipin Kumar Chauhan and also simultaneously registered the list of office bearers of the Society produced by respondent no. 4 who claimed that another elections were held in 2020. The order dated 11th December, 2020 was challenged by Vipin Kumar Chauhan before this Court through Writ -C No. 7978 of 2021. It is relevant to note that in the order dated 11th December, 2020, the Deputy Registrar did not record any finding on the claim of Vipin Kumar Chauhan regarding the expulsion of respondent no. 4, Lakhan Singh and Mahendra Singh from the Society vide resolution dated 29th May, 2016. In Writ -C No. 7978 of 2021, this Court held that findings on the issue regarding the expulsion of respondent no. 4 and two other persons from the Society was necessary to decide the validity of the elections claimed by respondent no. 4 and consequently of the list submitted by him in 2016 and quashed the order dated 11th December, 2020 passed by the Deputy Registrar and remanded back the matter to the Deputy Registrar to record a finding on the validity of the resolution dated 29th May, 2016. The Deputy Registrar vide his impugned order dated 8th April, 2022 has rejected the claim of Vipin Kumar Chauhan that the respondent no. 4, Mahendra Singh Chauhan and Lakhan Singh had been expelled by the General Body of the Society vide its resolution dated 29th May, 2016. Hence, the present petition.
4. The Deputy Registrar vide his order dated 8th April, 2022 has rejected the claim of Vipin Kumar Chauhan on the ground that the proceedings of the meeting dated 29th May, 2016 produced by Vipin Kumar Chauhan appeared to be a forged document and the aforesaid finding has been recorded by the Deputy Registrar on the ground that the alleged meeting held on 29.5.2016 was not presided over either by the then President of the Society or Santosh Kumar Raghav, the Vice-President of the Society. In his order dated 8.4.2022, the Deputy Registrar
The absence of proper notice for the meeting invalidated the resolution passed, supporting the Deputy Registrar's decision.
Point of Law : Parties could not have been relegated to avail the remedy provided under Section 25 (1) of the Act. In fact, the Deputy Registrar in the order impugned was not concerned only with elec....
The Assistant Registrar has the authority to reject election claims based on insufficient documentation, but must first resolve membership disputes under Section 4-B before conducting elections under....
Vacancies in society leadership require legally conducted elections under the Societies Registration Act.
The principles of natural justice must be adhered to in administrative decisions, particularly when such decisions have civil consequences, ensuring that all affected parties are given a fair opportu....
The court affirmed that the Assistant Registrar must assess the bona fides of disputes before deciding on their referral to the Prescribed Authority under the Societies Registration Act.
The Assistant Registrar lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate on the validity of elections under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and any disputes must be referred to the prescribed authority under S....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
