Sudhir Narain, J. - (1.) THIS Special Appeal is directed against the order of a learned Single Judge dated 28th August, 1993 whereby he stayed the operation of the order dated 28th July. 1993 passed by Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, U. P., Meerut Region, Meerut, renewing registration certificate in favour of the appellant.
(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that there is a religious educational institution known as Madarasa Mazahir Uloom, Mubarak Shah, Saharanpur. THE respondent, Muzaffar Hussain, claimed right to manage the institution as Mutawali of the Waqf property. THE members of the Managing Committee moved an application for registration of the society known as Society Madarsa Mazahir Uloom, Mubarak Shandh, Saharanpir in the year 1985 under section 3 of the Societies Registration Act, 1868 (in short the 'Act'). THE respondent filed objection before the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, U. P., Meerut Region, Meerut alleging that the Waqf was created in the name of the Madarsa and registered with the U. P. Sunni Central Board of Waqf, Lucknow and he was appointed as Nazim/Mutawallia of the said Waqf and it could not be managed by any society. This objection of the respondent was replied and the society was directed to be registered by order dated 18th October, 1985. THE respondent filed Writ Petition No. 16110 of 1985, Muzaffar Hussain and another v. Assistant Registrar, Firms Societies and Chits, U. P., Meerut Region, Meerut and others. THE High Court quashed the order of the Assistant Registrar dated 18th October, 1985 and directed the Assistant Registrar to refer the question of registration of the society under section 3-8 of the Act to the State Government. THE State Government rejected the objection of the respondent by order dated 2nd May, 1988 and held that the appellant was entitled for registration of the society. THE petitioner again filed Writ Petition No, 13741 of 1988. In the said writ petition he also filed an application for interim injunction on which notice was issued but no interim stay order was granted. THE writ petition is still pending and no interim order has yet been passed in the said writ petition. THE appellant was, however, granted registration certificate in pursuance of the order dated 2nd May, 1988 for a period of five years. THE appellant, on 31st Mach, 1993, submitted application for renewal of the registration certificate under section 3-A of the Act before the Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, U. P., Meerut Region, Meerut. THE Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Meerut Region, Meerut by order dated 2nd July, 1993 allowed the application for renewal of the certificate of registration and granted on the same day a certificate of renewal of registration for a period of five years. The respondent filed writ petition against the aforesaid order of the Deputy Registrar mainly on the .ground that he had filed objection before the Deputy Registrar concerned but without taking into consideration the said objection the certificate of renewal of registration was issued. Learned Single Judge stayed the operation of the said order. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the respondent had raised only those objections which he had taken at the time of grant of registration cen;ficate and the same matter having been decided by the State Government, it could not be agitated again before the Resistrar concerned. The appellant was entitled to renewal of registration certificate as a matter of right under sub-section (2) of section 3-A of the Act. The appellant was managing the institution and by staying the operation of the order of renewal of certificate of registration the appellant shall be treated as unregistered society and that would cause irreparable loss and injury to the society.
(3.) A preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the respondent that the appeal has been filed against an interim order and no Special Appeal is maintainable under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Rules of the Court against an interim order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. It is not disputed that under Chapter VIII Rule 5 a Special Appeal is maintainable only against a judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court. It reads as follows :- "5. Special Appeal-An appeal shall lie to the Court from a judgment (..........) of one Judge." (Omission and emphasis supplied);