The petitioners have sought the quashing of the order dated 8th October, 2009 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Varanasi as also the order dated 1st January, 2010 by which the application filed by the petitioners for recalling the said order was rejected.
By the order dated 8th October, 2009, the Assistant Registrar has rejected the objections filed by the petitioners to the list submitted by respondent no.3, Ram Jeet Yadav and has also rejected the prayer of the petitioner for holding the elections under Section 25(2) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860.
Sri R.K. Ojha assisted by Sri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that in the order dated 8th October, 2009, the Assistant Registrar has referred to two dates which were fixed by him for hearing the matter namely 5th September, 2009 and 30th September, 2009 but the Assistant Registrar was not available in the office on these two dates and 27th October, 2009 was fixed by the Clerk in the office of the Assistant Registrar as the next date. However, the impugned order was passed on 8th October, 2009. The petitioners, therefore, moved an application dated 27th October, 2009 before the Assistant Registrar pointing out these facts but this application was rejected by the Assistant Registrar holding that he does not have the power to recall the order. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Assistant Registrar was not justified in rejecting the application on this ground.
Learned Standing Counsel appears for respondent nos.1 and 2 while Sri Pankaj Kumar Srivastava appears for respondent no.3. They state that it may not be necessary to file any counter affidavit and the petition may be disposed of at this stage. The only relief prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the application filed by them on 27th October, 2009 may be disposed of on merits. This application had been filed by the petitioners before the Assistant Registrar for recalling the order dated 8th October, 2009 on the ground that in fact no hearing had taken place on 5th September, 2009 and 30th September, 2009 as the Assistant Registrar was not available in the office and 27th October, 2009 was fixed but the matter was decided on 8th October, 2009. This application should have been decided by the Assistant Registrar on merits but it has been rejected on the ground that he does not have the power to review the order.
In such circumstances, the order dated 1st January, 2010 passed by the Assistant Registrar is set aside. The Assistant Registrar shall now pass an appropriate order on the application dated 27th October, 2009 filed by the petitioners after hearing the parties concerned expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is filed by the petitioners before the Assistant Registrar.
The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.
Order Date :- 25.1.2010 GS