HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Rahul and 4 others …..Appellant(s)

Versus State of U.P., through Principal Secretary and 5 others …..Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s) : Prabhakar Awasthi (Sr. Adv.) with Saurabh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : Rajiv Singh (S.C.), Grijesh Tiwari Chief Justice's Court HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.

1. Heard Shri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Saurabh Tripathi appearing for the appellants, learned Standing Counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 and Shri Grijesh Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents.

2. The present appeal is reported to be beyond time by 130 days. An application seeking condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been filed and in the affidavit supporting the application, it is stated that delay has occurred on account of the fact that copy of the election proceedings, as set up by the respondents, was sought from the office of the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Prayagraj, which could become available to the appellants on

22.08.2025 and, therefore, delay may be condoned.

3. For the reasons stated in the affidavit, the application is allowed.

Delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.

4. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 08.04.2025 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed Writ C No.9686 of 2025 filed by the appellants with an observation that if the petitioner- appellants are so advised, they may challenge the order impugned in appropriate proceedings before appropriate forum.

5. The writ petition was filed by the appellants assailing the orders dated 31.05.2024 and 18.09.2024, both passed by the Assistant Registrar. By the order dated 31.05.2024, list of office bearers of the Society in question for the year 2024-25 was registered under Section 4-B of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 ('the Act') and, by order dated 18.09.2024, objections filed by the appellants against the order dated

31.05.2024 were rejected.

6. Before the learned Single Judge, arguments were advanced on behalf of the appellants that no elections of the Society in question were held after 2005 nor was any list of office bearers registered and, therefore, there being no valid Committee of Management of the Society, induction of two members namely, Deependra Dev and Abhishek Yadav, was illegal and without jurisdiction.

7. The said submissions were opposed on behalf of the respondents not only on the ground of substantial delay in filing the writ petition but also taking aid of certain proceedings and lists of office bearers having been registered from time to time since after 2005.

8. Learned Single Judge, based upon the submissions made, arrived at a conclusion that whether the elections were or were not held since 2005, the same being a question of fact, can be determined on the basis of documentary and oral evidence. It was further observed that question of induction of two members by a valid or invalid Committee of Management, also being a question of fact, the writ petition, at that stage, was misconceived. While dismissing the writ petition, learned Single Judge left it open to the petitioners to challenge the orders in appropriate proceedings before appropriate forum.

9. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the appellants in the present appeal bringing on record an order dated 09.12.2025 passed by the Assistant Registrar, whereby list of office bearers of the Society for the year 2025-26 has been registered under Sections 4(1) and 4-B of the Act. A certificate of renewal of registration of Society for period of five years w.e.f. 10.10.2025 has also been appended.

10. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants has made vehement submissions that no elections pertaining to Society were ever held since 2005 and whatever lists were produced on behalf of the respondents before the learned Single Judge, the same pertain to electi