Disputes regarding office bearers in a society fall under the purview of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and should be resolved by the appropriate authority rather than through writ jurisdiction.

JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Gupta C. J.

1. The present petition is directed against an order dated 09.05.2024 passed by respondent no.3- Deputy Registrar, Societies, Firms and Chits, Udham Singh Nagar, District Udham Singh Nagar/Chief Treasury Officer, District Udham Singh Nagar, by which list of office bearers of a registered Society named Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee, Shri Nanakmatta Sahib, Nanakmatta, Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand has been registered, exercising power u/s 4 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (for short, the Act). Petitioners have further prayed for quashing of the list of office bearers registered by respondent no.3. A further prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 31.08.2007 issued by respondent no.1, whereby the State Government has decentralized the powers conferred on the Registrar under the Act.

2. The facts, in brief, are that the petitioners claim that they are members of the aforesaid Society. Petitioner no.2 claims that he was elected as President and one Smt. Kamlesh Kaur as Vice President in the meeting dated 06.04.2022 held for electing the office bearers of the Committee of Management of the Society. It seems that petitioner no.2 was suspected to be involved in murder of a Jatthedar at Karsewa Shri Nanakmatta Sahib, on basis of which Case Crime No.83/2024 u/s 302, 120-B and Section 37 IPC was registered. Petitioner no.2 is a named accused out of five accused persons. In wake of the same, petitioner no.2 tendered resignation from the post of President on 16.04.2024. His resignation was accepted in meeting of the Prabandhak Committee held on 05.05.2024.

3. The case of the petitioner no.2 is that even before the meeting of the office bearers and Directors of Prabandhak Committee was held on 05.05.2024, he by means of an application dated 02.05.2024, withdrew his resignation. It is also the case of petitioner no.2 that respondent no.6, the General Secretary, illegally called the meeting dated 05.05.2024, although the Acting President on 27.04.2024, had sought written opinion by way of affidavit from all the elected Directors on the resignation of petitioner no.2. It is also alleged that on 05.05.2024, there was no agenda for filling up the post of President, but respondent no.7 got himself elected illegally. On basis of resolution passed in the meeting of the Directors dated 05.05.2024, a new list of office bearers was submitted and wherein respondent no.7 was shown as President. The said list of office bearers has been registered by respondent no.3 on 09.05.2024. On 12.05.2024, petitioner no.2 made a representation to respondent no.3 stating that meeting dated 05.05.2024 was illegal and thereafter the subsequent action dated 11.05.2024, expelling him from membership of the Society, is also illegal. Respondent no.3, according to the petitioners, has taken cognizance of the said complaint and has sought explanation of respondent nos.6 and 7. It is admitted that so far the Deputy Registrar has not taken any decision on the aspect of alleged illegal expulsion of petitioner no.2 from membership of the Society.

4. The grievance in the present petition is both in respect of alleged illegal acceptance of the resignation submitted by petitioner no.2 and his expulsion from the membership of the Society on 11.05.2024.

5. The admitted case of the petitioner no.2 is that he tendered resignation on 16.04.2024. It is also not disputed that in the meeting dated 05.05.2024 the resignation was accepted, although petitioner no.2 alleges that the meeting dated 05.05.2024 was illegally held and also that respondent n