Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length.
The petitioner contends that the Assistant Registrar could not have recognized and registered the list of office bearers as submitted by the respondent no. 3 in the wake of the claim of petitioners relating to the elections held on 22nd August, 2010.
The Assistant Registrar respondent no. 2 has rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that it is in violation of Clause 17 (2) of the Bye-laws of the Society. For this, the said authority has relied on the fact that the list of office bearers of the contesting respondents has been supported by two existing life members. One existing founder member and one committee member, namely, Sri Gaya Prasad Yadav and Sri Malkhan Singh whereas the claim of the petitioner is absolutely unfounded and based on no evidence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this claim could have been decided by the Prescribed Authority under Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860.
The contention of the petitioner could have been accepted provided there was some material to even prima facie establish that the petitioner's claim of entering into the society is based on any valid material. There is nothing either on record nor there was anything before the Assistant Registrar and therefore the Assistant Registrar is not bound to refer every dispute, inasmuch as, it is only a bona-fide claim which can be gone into for the purpose of deciding the claim of rival parties under Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act. The Assistant Registrar is not a mere post office as held by this Court in the Division Bench of this Court in case of Committee of Management, Kisan Shiksha Sadan, Banksahi, District Basti and another Vs. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur and another reported in 1995 (2) U.P. L.B.E.C Pg. 1242 Accordingly, if the petitioner wants to establish any such right, he has to come forward with evidence which is completely lacking and the mere framing of a resolution setting up an election is not sufficient for the Assistant Registrar to refer such a dispute without any material to support the same.
The writ petition is dismissed with the said observations.
Order Date :- 10.7.2012 Sahu