High Court

Judge in Writ-C No. 3338 of 2025 whereby the writ petition filed by the appellants against order dated 09.12.2024 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firm, Societies and Chits, Kanpur Region, Kanpur whereby he had referred the matter to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil - Rasoolabad, District Kanpur Dehat, has been dismissed.

2. A society in the name and style of Education Extension Society, District - Kanpur Dehat is registered under the provisions of Society Registration Act, 1860 ('the Act'). The last election of the society were held on 29.10.2017, which was challenged by one Jai Narain Singh. The matter was referred to the Deputy Registrar under Section 25(1) of the Act. The reference was challenged by filing Writ - C No. 8578 of 201, which petition came to be allowed and the order of reference dated 18.12.2018 was quashed.

3. At the end of the term of the office bearers, fresh election were held on

07.04.2024 by the appellants as an outgoing committee. Application was submitted on 28.06.2024 for registration of the election proceedings and approval. Respondent no. 4 submitted a complaint on 15.06.2024 on which notice was issued on 29.06.2024.

4. While the complaint was still pending, respondent no. 4 produced election proceedings dated 15.09.2024 claiming election of the society. The Deputy Registrar by order impugned in the writ petition dated 09.12.2024 observing that two separate proceedings have been produced and therefore, referred the matter under Section 25(1) of the Act to the prescribed authority. Feeling aggrieved, writ petition was filed questioning the validity of the reference.

5. Learned single Judge, in relation to the objection raised pertaining to the Deputy Registrar acting in a mechanical manner and not recording a finding regarding the dispute being genuine, came to the conclusion that such objection can be raised before the prescribed authority and distinguished the judgements cited in this regard and dismissed the writ petition.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants, emphasized that the law is settled wherein the Deputy Registrar is not required to act like a post office and is required to take a call before referring the dispute under Section 25(1) of the Act to the prescribed authority, however, though the Deputy Registrar, has passed the order in a mechanical manner, non interference by learned Single Judge is not justified.

7. Reliance has been placed on Shailendra Singh & others v. State of U.P. & others : 2017 (6) ADJ 602 and Committee of Management, Chandrawati Shikshan Sansthan & 7 others v. State of U.P. & others : 2024 :AHC:90156- DB.

8. Learned counsel for the respondents supported the order impugned. Submission has been made that the Deputy Registrar was bound to refer the dispute under Section 25(1) of the Act and therefore, no interference is required in the order impugned.

9. Reliance has been placed on Gram Shiksha Sudhar Samiti, Junior High School, Sikandra, District - Kanpur Dehat & another v. Regisrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, U.P., Lucknow and others : (2010) 3 UPLBEC 2522.

10. We have considered the submissions made by counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

11. The Deputy Registrar after noticing the facts, as noticed by us hereinbefore, passed the following order : "इस प्रककार उपररोक्त ससंस्थका ककी ककारकार्यालर मम दरो अलग अलग चचुनकाव ककारर्यावकाहहिरयों प्रस्तचुत हिरो जकानने कने ककारण रहि प्रकरण सरोसका०रजज०अजधि० 1860 ककी धिकारका 25 (1) कने अन्तगर्यात आतका हिहै। जजस पर हनणर्यार कका अजधिककार आप मम हनहहित हिहै। अततः उक्त प्रकरण सरोसका०रजज०अजधि० 1860 ककी धिकारका 25 (1) कने अन्तगर्यात आपकरो सन्दहरर्यात हकरका जकातका हिहै। कक परका प्रकरण ककी सचुनवकाई कर हनणर्यार ककी एक प्रहत इस ककारकार्यालरसं करो प्रनेहषित करनने कका कष करने।"

12. It would be seen that except for indicating that two separate election proceedings have been presented, and that the matter falls within Section 25(1) of the Act, the authority has referred the same to the prescribed authority.

13. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Shailendra Singh (Supra) after taking into consideration the entire law on the subject, came to the conclusion that Registrar in every case cannot be forced to refer the dispute to the prescribed authority and based upon evidence adduced Registrar has to take a call as to whose list of office bearers and members is required to be taken on record.

14. The Court further came to the conclusion that Section 25 of the Act provides forum for settlement of dispute in summary manner and it does not altogether oust the authority of the Registrar. It was further laid down that power of the Registrar cannot be divested only on the ground that under Section 25 of the Act he has authority to refer the dispute pertaining to election to the prescribed authority.

15. In view thereof, apparently the order dated 09.12.2024 passed by the Deputy Registrar in a mechanical manner referring the dispute to the prescribed authority is contrary to the settled law.

16. So far as the judgement in the case of Gram Shiksha Sudhar Samiti (Supra) is concerned, the said judgement has been duly noticed in the case of Shailendra Singh (Supra).

17. In view of the above discussions, the order impugned passed by learned Single Judge cannot be sustained.

18. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 05.02.2025 passed in Writ - C No. 3338 of 2025 is set aside. The writ petition is allowed to the extent that the order dated 09.12.2024 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Deputy Registrar to hear and decide the matter afresh.

19. Needful be done within a period of four weeks from the date a copy of this order is placed by the parties before the Deputy Registrar. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)

Judge in Writ-C No. 3338 of 2025 whereby the writ petition filed by the appellants against order dated 09.12.2024 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firm, Societies and Chits, Kanpur Region, Kanpur whereby he had referred the matter to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil - Rasoolabad, District Kanpur Dehat, has been dismissed.

2. A society in the name and style of Education Extension Society, District - Kanpur Dehat is registered under the provisions of Society Registration Act, 1860 ('the Act'). The last election of the society were held on 29.10.2017, which was challenged by one Jai Narain Singh. The matter was referred to the Deputy Registrar under Section 25(1) of the Act. The reference was challenged by filing Writ - C No. 8578 of 201, which petition came to be allowed and the order of reference dated 18.12.2018 was quashed.

3. At the end of the term of the office bearers, fresh election were held on

07.04.2024 by the appellants as an outgoing committee. Application was submitted on 28.06.2024 for registration of the election proceedings and approval. Respondent no. 4 submitted a complaint on 15.06.2024 on which notice was issued on 29.06.2024.

4. While the complaint was still pending, respondent no. 4 produced election proceedings dated 15.09.2024 claiming election of the society. The Deputy Registrar by order impugned in the writ petition dated 09.12.2024 observing that two separate proceedings have been produced and therefore, referred the matter under Section 25(1) of the Act to the prescribed authority. Feeling aggrieved, writ petition was filed questioning the validity of the reference.

5. Learned single Judge, in relation to the objection raised pertaining to the Deputy Registrar acting in a mechanical manner and not recording a finding regarding the dispute being genuine, came to the conclusion that such objection can be raised before the prescribed authority and distinguished the judgements cited in this regard and dismissed the writ petition.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants, emphasized that the law is settled wherein the Deputy Registrar is not required to act like a post office and is required to take a call before referring the dispute under Section 25(1) of the Act to the prescribed authority, however, though the Deputy Registrar, has passed the order in a mechanical manner, non interference by learned Single Judge is not justified.

7. Reliance has been placed on Shailendra Singh & others v. State of U.P. & others : 2017 (6) ADJ 602 and Committee of Management, Chandrawati Shikshan Sansthan & 7 others v. State of U.P. & others : 2024 :AHC:90156- DB.

8. Learned counsel for the respondents supported the order impugned. Submission has been made that the Deputy Registrar was bound to refer the dispute under Section 25(1) of the Act and therefore, no interference is required in the order impugned.

9. Reliance has been placed on Gram Shiksha Sudhar Samiti, Junior High School, Sikandra, District - Kanpur Dehat & another v. Regisrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, U.P., Lucknow and others : (2010) 3 UPLBEC 2522.

10. We have considered the submissions made by counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

11. The Deputy Registrar after noticing the facts, as noticed by us hereinbefore, passed the following order : "इस प्रककार उपररोक्त ससंस्थका ककी ककारकार्यालर मम दरो अलग अलग चचुनकाव ककारर्यावकाहहिरयों प्रस्तचुत हिरो जकानने कने ककारण रहि प्रकरण सरोसका०रजज०अजधि० 1860 ककी धिकारका 25 (1) कने अन्तगर्यात आतका हिहै। जजस पर हनणर्यार कका अजधिककार आप मम हनहहित हिहै। अततः उक्त प्रकरण सरोसका०रजज०अजधि० 1860 ककी धिकारका 25 (1) कने अन्तगर्यात आपकरो सन्दहरर्यात हकरका जकातका हिहै। कक परका प्रकरण ककी सचुनवकाई कर हनणर्यार ककी एक प्रहत इस ककारकार्यालरसं करो प्रनेहषित करनने कका कष करने।"

12. It would be seen that except for indicating that two separate election proceedings have been presented, and that the matter falls within Section 25(1) of the Act, the authority has referred the same to the prescribed authority.

13. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Shailendra Singh (Supra) after taking into consideration the entire law on the subject, came to the conclusion that Registrar in every case cannot be forced to refer the dispute to the prescribed authority and based upon evidence adduced Registrar has to take a call as to whose list of office bearers and members is required to be taken on record.

14. The Court further came to the conclusion that Section 25 of the Act provides forum for settlement of dispute in summary manner and it does not altogether oust the authority of the Registrar. It was further laid down that power of the Registrar cannot be divested only on the ground that under Section 25 of the Act he has authority to refer the dispute pertaining to election to the prescribed authority.

15. In view thereof, apparently the order dated 09.12.2024 passed by the Deputy Registrar in a mechanical manner referring the dispute to the prescribed authority is contrary to the settled law.

16. So far as the judgement in the case of Gram Shiksha Sudhar Samiti (Supra) is concerned, the said judgement has been duly noticed in the case of Shailendra Singh (Supra).

17. In view of the above discussions, the order impugned passed by learned Single Judge cannot be sustained.

18. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 05.02.2025 passed in Writ - C No. 3338 of 2025 is set aside. The writ petition is allowed to the extent that the order dated 09.12.2024 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Deputy Registrar to hear and decide the matter afresh.

19. Needful be done within a period of four weeks from the date a copy of this order is placed by the parties before the Deputy Registrar. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)