K.N.Gopal, J. - (1.) This petition Is directed against an order of the Prescribed Authority under Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act. The Society was registered in April, 1979. Thereafter, according to the petitioners, an election was held in December, 1981, while, according to the opposite parties 3 and 4. the valid election was held only in June, 1982. On account of the dispute in this regard having arisen before the Registrar, the matter was referred to the Prescribed Authority under the said Section 25. The Prescribed Authority has held that the election at which the petitioner were declared in December, 1981 was invalid. Aggrieved thereby the petitioners have come to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution
(2.) Learned Counsel for the opposite-parties have raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the petitioners had an alternative remedy of suit as the decision of the described Authority is not final as held in Prabhat Misra v. Jai Shankar Tripathi, 1978 ALJ 672. Of course, the decision of the Prescribed Authority is of a summary nature, and a civil suit may not be barred. But when the prescribed term of the Committee of Management is itself three years and more than three years have passed since the alleged election at which the petitioners were elected, there is no justification now for relegating the petitioners to the alternative remedy of civil suit.
(3.) The Prescribed Authority has based its order on two grounds. Firstly, the election was held before the expiry of the term of the original Committee. The authority has taken the view that the election could be held only after the expiry of the term. This view seems clearly unwarranted. There is nothing in the bye-laws of the Society to indicate that election should take place only after the expiry of the term. Normally an election to any body should be completed before the expiry of the term so that the new body may assume office immediately after the expiry of the term of the outgoing body.;