Learned counsel for the petitioners appeared.
Learned standing counsel appeared and accepted notices for opposite parties no. 1 to 4.
Shri J.B.S. Rathore appeared and accepted notice for opposite party no.5.
Opposite parties nos. 6 and 7 are private parties. They have not turned out.
Issue notice to opposite parties no. 6 and 7.
Steps shall be taken within a week.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned standing counsel for opposite parties no.1 to 4 and learned counsel for opposite party no.5.
Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 20.2.2013 passed in Misc. Single No. 2804 of 2001 C/M Sardar Patel Purva Madhyamik Vidyalaya Meerdapur Vs. Deputy Registrar Firms Societies and Chits Faizabad and others has directed that the competent authority will conduct fresh election under the supervision of the District Magistrate concerned within a period of six months but in pursuance of the said order of this Court election has not been conducted by the competent authority because in view of Section 25(2) of Societies Registration Act, 1860 Registrar or any officer authorities by him is competent authority to hold election.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further contended that in pursuance of the order dated 20.2.2013 passed by this Court District Magistrate appointed Up Zila Adhikari, Jai Singhpur, Sultanpur to conduct election which is against provisions of Section 25(2) of Societies Registration Act, 1860. Therefore, it is apparent that the election has not been conducted by the competent authority as directed by this Court vide order dated 20.2.2013. Therefore, election conducted by him is not in accordance with law and afresh election is necessary. Learned counsel for the petitioners further contended that in view of above, election conducted by opposite party no.3 should not be given effect and status-quo should be maintained.
Learned counsel for the petitioners relied on judgment of Division Bench of this Court rendered in the case of Harish Chandra Gupta Vs. Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, U.P., Lucknow and others reported in LCD 321 in which Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court has held as follows:
"After the meeting has been called, the next question is (1) who will preside over the meeting and (2) how the meeting will be conducted. The first relates to the manner of exercise of power and the latter to the rules applicable to the further exercise of power. About the Ist section 25(2) says that the meeting may be prescribed over by the Registrar himself or by his nominee. It is only here that a functionary other than the Registrar comes in the picture and that is, his nominee. The meeting whether presided over by the Registrar himself or by his nominee will have to be conducted in accordance with the rules of the Society relating to meetings and elections."
Learned standing counsel for opposite parties no. 1 to 4 and learned counsel for opposite party no.5 contended that election has been conducted strictly in accordance with direction issued by this Court vide order dated 20.2.2013 passed in Misc. Single No. 2804 of 2001 C/M Sardar Patel Purva Madhyamik Vidyalaya Meerdapur Vs. Deputy Registrar Firms Societies and Chits Faizabad and others.
Learned standing counsel for opposite parties no. 1 to 4 and learned counsel for opposite party no.5 further contended that in compliance of the said order passed by this Court District Magistrate nominated Up Zila Adhikari Jaisinghpur, Sultanpur to conduct the election vide order dated 6.2.2014. The District Magistrate opposite party no.2 has specifically mentioned in his order dated 6.2.2014 that Deputy Registrar, Firms Societies and Chits, Faizabad has furnished list of members of general body of Sardar Patel Junior High School Meerdapur, Guptarganj, District Sultanpur vide letter no.5074/I-13745/Faizabad dated 11.10.2013. Therefore, election conducted by Up Zila Adhikari in pursuance of the order issued by the District Magistrate is not in violation provision of Section 25(2) of Societies Registration Act, 1860.
Learned standing counsel for opposite parties no. 1 to 4 and learned counsel for opposite party no.5 have drawn my attention on order dated 20.2.2013 passed by this Court wherein direction has been given that after fresh election new management will discharge normal duties.
Learned standing counsel for opposite parties no. 1 to 4 and learned counsel for opposite party no.5 have cited judgment of Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court rendered in Misc. Single No.6095 of 2012 vs. The C/M Shesh Nath Junior High School and another Vs. State of U.P. and others in which it has been held that once election process is started no interference should be made in it.
I have considered submissions made by both parties.
Admittedly election in dispute has been conducted in pursuance of the order dated 20.2.2013 passed by this court in Misc. Single No. 2804 of 2001 C/M Sardar Patel Purva Madhyamik Vidyalaya Meerdapur Vs. Deputy Registrar Firms Societies and Chits Faizabad and others. In its order dated dated 20.2.2013 Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court has issued following direction regarding "election".
It is further directed that competent authority will conduct fresh election under the supervision of District Magistrate concerned within a period of six months thereafter and the new management will normal discharge duties. Till then the District Magistrate concerned shall continue as sole administrator to remove any legal hurdle.
In pursuance of the above direction of this Court District Magistrate has directed his subordinate officer Up Zila Adhikari to conduct election vide his order dated 6.2.2014 and order dated 6.2.2014 passed by District Magistrate shows that Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits has provided list of members of general body of the institution to the District Magistrate and on the basis of said list District Magistrate has ordered Up Zila Adhikari to conduct election in pursuance of above order dated 20.2.2013 passed by this Court.
In view of above I am of the view that any interim order should be passed after affording opportunity of counter and rejoinder affidavits to parties.
Therefore, opposite parties are granted time to file counter affidavit within two weeks. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within a week thereafter.
List on 14.7.2014 for hearing.
Order Date :- 20.6.2014 R.U.