IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
JASPREET SINGH, J.
Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Lucknow Thru. Pradhan Devendra Pal Verma And Another – Appellants
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Institutional Finance, Lko. And Others – Respondent
Writ - C No. - 14794 of 2021, Writ - C No. - 3418 of 2022
Decided on : 18-09-2024
Societies Registration Act, 1860 - Section 25(1) - Internal conflict within Arya Pratinidhi Sabha regarding management and elections - Four factions claimed rights based on different elections - Deputy Registrar referred matter to Prescribed Authority without adequate examination - Court quashed the order for lack of reasoning and remitted the matter for fresh consideration. (Paras 1-119)
Facts of the case:
The petitions were filed by Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, represented by different factions claiming rights based on separate elections held on various dates. The Deputy Registrar referred the matter to the Prescribed Authority due to conflicting claims.
Findings of Court:
The Deputy Registrar's order was quashed for being non-reasoned and mechanical, failing to address the bona fide nature of the disputes. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration.
Issues: The main issue was whether the Deputy Registrar properly assessed the conflicting claims and the validity of the elections before referring the matter to the Prescribed Authority.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the Deputy Registrar must apply judicial mind to ascertain the bona fide nature of disputes before making a referral, ensuring that validly elected committees are not unjustly challenged.
Result: Writ Petition No. 3418 of 2022 allowed; Writ Petition No. 14794 of 2021 dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Jaspreet Singh, J.
1. The instant two petitions have been filed by Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (for short, "the Act of 1860") having its registered office at 5, Meerabai Marg, Lucknow. However, in both the petitions, the society is represented by different officer bearers inasmuch as in WRIT-C No.3418/2022, it is represented by its alleged President Shri Devendra Pal Verma, who is the petitioner No.2 whereas in WRIT-C No.14794/2021, it is represented through its Secretary namely Shri Bhuwan Tiwari, who is impleaded as petitioner No.2, therein.
2. There is an internal conflict relating to the management of the society and as such four set of factions have claimed rights on the basis of four separate alleged elections. One faction has set up their rights on the basis of an election said to have been held on 21.03.2021 wherein Shri Devendra Pal Verma is said to have been elected as a President, who has filed WRIT-C No.3418/2022. The second faction is led by Shri Bhuwan Tiwari, who has filed WRIT-C No.14794/2021 wherein he claims rights on the basis of his election allegedly held on 20.02.2021. The third faction is led by Shri Vivek Singh, who alleges that his election was held on 07.03.2021, though Shri Vivek Singh is not a party in WRIT-C No.14794/2021 but he is impleaded as respondent No.5 in WRIT-C No.3418/2022. The fourth faction is led by Shri Ram Ratan Chaturvedi, who claims rights on the basis of an alleged election dated 27.11.2021. Shri Chaturvedi has not been impleaded in WRIT-C No.14794/2021, but he is respondent No.6 in WRIT-C No.3418/2022.
3. Since, contesting parties are all represented in WRIT-C No.3418/2022 and it encompasses all the warring factions, hence, this Court for the sake of convenience shall consider and refer to the parties as they are impleaded in WRIT-C No.3418/2022. The issue involved in both the petitions is common, hence, by deciding the controversy in terms of WRIT-C No.3418/2022, it shall also dispose of WRIT-C No.14794/2021. Accordingly, both the petitions are being decided by this common judgment.
4. The faction led by Shri Devendra Pal Verma, the petitioner of WRIT-C No.3418/2022 is represented by Dr. L.P. Misra and Shri Atul Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel. The faction of Bhuwan Tiwari is represented by Shri Ratnesh Chandra, who is the counsel for the petitioner in the connected WRIT-C No.14794/2021. The third faction led by Shri Vivek Singh, who is respondent No.5 and is represented by Shri Nadeem Murtaza, Advocate and the fourth faction led by Shri Ram Ratan Chaturvedi, who is respondent No.6, is represented by Shri Gaurav Mehtrotra, Advocate.
5. Under challenge in WRIT-C No.3418/2022 is the order passed by the respondent No.2 dated 23.04.2022 whereby the Deputy Registrar, Society, Chit and Fund, Lucknow Region has referred the matter to the Prescribed Authority in terms of Section 25(1) of the Act of 1860. While doing so, the Deputy Registrar noticed that four separate factions have set up their own separate elections and in terms of the legislative prescription, the Deputy Registrar is mandated to refer the matter to the Prescribed Authority who is the competent authority to decide the validity of the rival elections set up by the four separate factions.
6. In the connected WRIT-C No.14794/2021 which was filed prior in time to the WRIT-C No.3418/2022, a challenge has been made to the order impugned and said to have been passed by the Deputy Registrar registering the list of Members of Managing Committee of the Society in context with an election allegedly held on 26.03.2021 wherein Shri Devendra Pal Verma (who is the petitioner No.2 in WRIT-C No.3418/2022) was elected as the President and a further prayer has been made to register the names of the Committee Members of the faction led by Bhuwan Tiwari in pursuance of the election said to have been held on 20.02.2021.
7. This ongoing litigation between the warring factions has a
Committee of Management Shri Vidur Sewa Ashram & 7 others v. State of U.P. & 4 other
Sarv U.P. Gramin Bank v. Manoj Kumar Sinha
Jagmittar Sain Bhagat and others v. Director, Health Services, Haryana and others
Christ Church McConaghy School Society, Lucknow v. Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits
The Deputy Registrar must apply judicial reasoning when assessing conflicting claims of election within a society, ensuring valid elections are not undermined by unsubstantiated disputes.
Arya Pratinidh Sabha – No confidence motion - issue regarding enrolling a new member or expelling a member is conferred on legally constituted Committee and an Administrator is not empowered to take ....
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....
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.
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....
No interference can be made in a writ petition for contesting the validity of the claim of members and the electoral college finalised by Assistant Registrar and the remedy open for petitioners is ei....
Point of Law : It is no doubt true that if there was any provision to be found in impugned Act which prevented the Wage Board from giving reasons for its decision, it might be construed to mean that ....
Vacancies in society leadership require legally conducted elections under the Societies Registration Act.
The court upheld the Single Judge's decision, emphasizing the importance of judicial review in administrative actions and the need for civil courts to resolve disputes between factions in a registere....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.