Court No. - 19
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20533 of 2018 Petitioner :- C/M Goswami Tulsi Das Poorva Madhyamik Vidyalay And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.
The instant writ petition is directed against the order dated 3.5.2018 passed by Assistant Registrar invoking power under Section 25(2) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 for holding election of the Committee of Management of a registered Society in the name of Goswami Tulsi Das Poorva Madhyamik Vidyalay.
It is not disputed before this Court that the last election of the Committee of Management was held on 15.3.2014 and the term of the Committee of Management is three years. The term of the petitioner Committee which came to be elected on 15.3.2014 has admittedly come to an end. Thus, there is no illegality in so far as the Assistant Registrar has invoked his power under Section 25(2) of the Act for holding elections.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Deputy Registrar has wrongly finalised a list at page 256 of his file for holding election without making any adjudication with regard to its correctness and validity. He submitted that the said list was introduced in the record in the year 2014 by the then Head Master Ram Narayan Chaudhary, by forging signature of petitioner No. 2. It is urged that the Assistant Registrar, in earlier part of the order himself has held that parties did not produce evidence regarding membership dispute, yet he proceeded to finalise the list. It is urged that before holding election, the Assistant Registrar should finalise the Electoral College, after inviting objections.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners to that extent seems to have force. The operative part of the impugned order states that none of the parties had filed any evidence before him so as to enable him to decide membership dispute, yet he has proceeded to direct that election would be held as per list annexed at page 256, which was submitted at the time of obtaining renewal. The said list, in the opinion of the Court, could not be treated as final one, as it was the specific case of the petitioners that it does not bear his signature and it was introduced in the record by the then Head Master at the time proceedings was undertaken for renewal of the registration certificate. Under Section 4-B, the Registrar has to decide membership dispute after examining the membership receipts, registers and other records, which were admittedly not produced before him. He could have notified the said list as a provisional list, inviting objections of the parties, and after finalising the Electoral College, further proceedings should have been undertaken. However, in the considered opinion of the Court, the direction for treating the said list as final and conclusive does not seem to be correct.
Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents very fairly states that the said list would be treated as provisional list and in case, any objection is raised against the same, it shall be decided by the Assistant Registrar before holding elections.
Accordingly, the part of the impugned order whereby list at page 256 of his file has been finalised for holding election is hereby set- aside. The Assistant Registrar shall finalise the Electoral College, after considering the objections, if any received by him before holding the election. The petitioners shall file certified copy of this order before the Assistant Registrar within two days.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 30.5.2018 AM/-