- (1.) THIS special appeal has been preferred against the order impugned dated 03.04.2013, passed in Writ Petition No.17891 of 2013; Bayalasi Saikshanik Samiti and another vs. State of U.P. Thru Secy. and others. The impugned order reads thus: "Two rival elections were set up in respect of the Committee of Management of Bayalasi Postgraduate Degree College, which has been established and is being run and managed by Bayalasi Shaikshanik Samiti, Jalalpur, district Jaunpur. The elections in fact are held from amongst the members of the society in accordance with the bye laws and the office bearers of the society ipso facto become the office bearers/member of the Committee of Management of the degree college. The first elections were set up by Bal Ram Singh dated 20.10.2008 and other by Hanuman Prasad Singh dated 19.10.2008. Both the elections were forwarded to the Vice Chancellor of the University for recognition of the Committee of Management under 2(13) of the State Universities Act. The Vice Chancellor of the Purvanchal University vide order dated 15.02.2010 held that none of the elections were valid and directed that fresh elections shall be held by the District Magistrate or his nominee on the basis of the list of members of the general body to be approved by the Assistant Registrar. While Assistant Registrar was undertaking the exercise for finalization of the electoral college, an application was made by Hanuman Prasad Singh for transfer of the proceedings to the Registrar himself. The Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits under the order dated 12.02.2013 has decided the dispute pertaining to the membership of general body for holding fresh elections of the Committee of Management and vide letter dated 15.02.2013 he has asked the Assistant Registrar to ensure that the elections are held accordingly. Counsel for the petitioner challenges the determination of the electoral college under the order of the Registrar. According to him the Registrar has committed an error in rejecting the register which was produced by the petitioner in respect of the membership and therefore it is his case that the order may be set aside. It is also contended that the Registrar could not have determined the electoral college. In my opinion no interference with the determination of electoral college is warranted at this stage of the proceedings. The order of the Vice Chancellor dated 15.02.2010 is not under challenge. After the elections are over it shall always be open to the petitioner to file reference petition under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act and all issues of fact in respect of membership shall be given gone into by the Prescribed Authority. Writ petition is dismissed."
(2.) IT is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that writ court has erred in law in interfering with the order of Registrar since he had finalized the electoral colleges, as such the same can be challenged by the appellants after elections are completed; the order of the Registrar impugned in the writ petition is without jurisdiction, as he has decided the membership of the general body without considering the objection raised by the appellants which the Registrar, Firms Societies and Chits has no jurisdiction to decide, as such the order dated 12.02.2013 passed by him is liable to be set aside. Moreover, the writ court by interfering in the order of Registrar has finalized the electoral colleges.
(3.) IT is also argued that the dispute with regard to the membership can be decided by the Assistant Registrar and not by the Registrar, as held by this Court in Writ Petition No.1868 of 2012; that moreover, the order dated 11.02.2010, passed by Vice -Chancellor was required to be passed after fixing the date for hearing of the dispute, but no such exercise had been undertaken by the Registrar while deciding the dispute; that claim of Hanuman Prasad Singh since beginning has been that he had enrolled the members after obtaining membership fee from them, but the aforesaid receipts belong to Bayalasi Mahavidyalay and not to Bayalasi Shaikshanik Samiti. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent argued that under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, the Registrar has jurisdiction to decide the dispute of membership of society, registration and other incidental matters and for such dispute he is under no obligation to refer the same to Prescribed Authority and in case any -one is aggrieved by the decision of the Registrar may approach Civil Court as laid down in the judgements rendered in case of Committee of Management, Kisan Shiksha Sadan, Banksahi, District Basti and another Vs. Assistant Registrar and another, 1995 2 UPLBEC 1242, in the case of Dr. Birendra Bahadur Singh Vs. Assistant Registrar, Varanasi Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.17628 of 2000 decided on 14.07.2003 and further in the case of Church City Junior High School, Meerut and Anr. Vs. State of U.P. and Ors, 2006 2 AllLJ 337.;