A.P. Singh, J. - (1.) Both the writ petitions are connected and need to be decided together. Writ Petition No. 2789 (M/S) of 1993 has been filed against an order dated 25-11 -93 which has been passed as consequence of the order dated 17-4-93: It is not necessary as agreed by the learned counsel for the parties to discuss the merits of Writ Petition No. 2789 (M/S) of 1993 and it will be sufficient for the disposal of both writ petitions that the facts and merits of W. P. No. 1049 (M/S) of 1993 are discussed for the reason that order impugned in W. P. No. 2789 (M/S) of 1993 being an order passed as a consequence of the order dated 17-4-93 which is impugned in W. P. No. 1040 (M/S) of 1993 therefore the impugned order of the later writ petition would fall through automatically with the quashing of the order impugned in the first writ petition and in case order impugned in first writ petition is upheld the second writ petition shall automatically fail.
(2.) First writ petition (W. P. No. 1049 (M/S) of 93 is directed against an order passed by the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Faizabad dated 17-4-93 (hereafter called the Registrar) copy whereof is annexure-3 to the writ petition, under Section 25 (2) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (Act No. 21 of 1860) (hereafter called the Act) as inserted by U. P. Amendment. By that order he has disapproved the list of 45 members of the Board of Trustees of the society known as Shri Hanumant HigherSecondary School, Bijethus, Surapur, district Sultanpur and has declared that the term of the society elected in 1989 for a period of three years has ceased to exist on the expiry of its term and its functioning is barred by time. The consequential order which has been challenged by petitioners in the second writ petition has also been passed by him under Section 25 (2) of the Act for fixing the time table for holding the election of the Managing Committee of the society. It is agreed by Shri Amit Bose, petitioners' learned counsel that if the order impugned in the first writ petition is upheld then the order impugned in the second writ petition will survive and cannot be challenged for being illegal.
(3.) Shri Amit Bose, learned counsel for the petitioners has challenged the order impugned in the first writ petition mainly on the ground that the Registrar has been conferred no power under Section 25 of the Act to de-recognise any election or to question the continuance of any member of the Managing Committee to function as such or in any case to question the legality of the election of the Managing Committee of the Society.;