JUDGMENT M. Katju, J.
1. Both the above special appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Special Appeal No. 703 of 2004 has been filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 25.5.2004 in Writ Petition No. 38344 of 2003.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. The facts of the case are that there is a society known as Kanyakubja Education Trust registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The society has its own Rules. Rule 3 (d) of the Rules of the Constitution of the Trust states :
"Office bearers shall be elected by the Board of Trustee for a period of four years."
5. There is no provision in the Rules of the Trust that the office bearers shall continue even after four years of the election until fresh election is held. Hence it follows that unless an election is held within four years of the previous election the office bearers automatically go out of office. In the present case, the election of the office bearers of the Trust was held on 10.6.1999 but it is alleged that fresh elections were held on 7.6.2003 which was within four years. However, the Deputy Registrar after detailed consideration of the evidence has held by his order dated 13.8.2003 that the said election dated 7.6.2003 was fake.
6. The findings of the Deputy Registrar in the order dated 13.8.2003 are as follows :
^^mijksDr foospuk ds r`rh; fcUnq dk ijh{k.k djus ij ;g Li"V gksrk gS fd Jh y{eh 'kadj voLFkh us izFke ckj vius i= ds }kjk fnukad 13-6-2003 dks ;g lwfpr fd;k fd dkU;dqCt ,twds'ku VLV dh vke lHkk }kjk cksM vkWQ VLVht ds lnL;ksa ,oa inkf/kdkfj;ksa ds pquko djk;s x;s A mDr i= esa u rks ;g mYys[k gS fd muds }kjk dfFkr pquko fdl fnukad dks lEiUu gq, vkSj u dFku ds laca/k esa dksbZ pquko cSBd dk;kZy; i= fnukad 17-6-2003 tkjh gksus ij fnukad 18-6-2003 dks vius i= fnuakd 9-6-2003 ds lkFk vke lHkk dh dk;Zokgh vkfn izLrqr u fd;s tkus dks fyfidh; =qfV crkrs gq, cSBd fnukad 7-6-2003 dh Vkbi izfr izLrqr dh A mDr ds voyksdu ls ;g Li"V gksrk gS fd mDr cSBd esa 49 lnL;ksa esa ls 27 lnL;ksa dh mifLFkfr crkbZ xbZ A mDr esa ukekadu ds tks izLrko ,oa leFkZd n'kkZ;s x;s os ek= 5 lnL; Fks rFkk 11 ukekadu ikIr gksus ftlesa mUgha 11 lnL;ksa esa ls inkf/kdkfj;ksa dk pquko gksuk n'kkZ;k x;k A mDr leLr dk;Zokgh ek= eux<Ur dkxth dk;Zokgh fl) gksrh gS D;ksafd ;fn fnukad 7-6-2003 dks dksbZ pquko gqvk gksrk rks mlh fnu inkf/kdkfj;ksa dk Hkh pquko gqvk gksrk rFkk fnukad 13-6-2003 dks izLrqr izcU/k lfefr dh lwph o"kZ 2003&2004 esa ukeksa ds vkxs inksa dk Hkh mYys[k gksrkA ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd mDr fnukad 13-6-2003 rd ;g r; ugha gks ik;k fd fdl lnL; dks cksMZ vkQ VLVht dh lwph esa dkSu lk in n'kkZ;k tk;sA tcfd Jh y{eh 'kadj voLFkh ds i= fnukad 13-6-2003 ds layXu ds ,d Vafdr gS fd cksMZ vkQ VLVht ds uo fuokZfpr lnL;ksa ,oa inkf/kdkfj;ksa dh lwph cSysU'khV Vkbi djds mls dkV x;k ftl ij Jh y{eh 'akdj voLFkh us Lo;a vius gLrk{kj cuk;s rFkk viuh bl feF;k dk;Zokgh ds R; dks fNikus ds fy, mls fyidh; =qfV crk;k blh gsrq fnukad 13-6-2003 dks vius i= ds lkFk dksbZ pquko cSBd dk;Zokgh Hkh izLrqr ugha dhA vr% ;g fufoZokn :i ls izekf.kr gksrk gS fd fnukad 7-6-2003 dks dksbZ cSBd vkgwr ugha dh x;hA blh dkj.k laLFkk dh lk/kkj.k lHkk ds mijksDrkuqlkj 34 lnL;ksa esa ls 20 lnL;ksa us bl dk;kZy; esa izR;kosnu izLrqr fd;k rFkk mu 20 lnL;ksa esa ls 19 lnL;ksa ds bl vk'; ds uksVjh 'kiFk i= izkIr gSa fd mUgsa dfFkr 7-6-2003 dh cSBd dh dksbZ lwpuk izkIr ugha gSA nwljh vksj Jh y{eh 'kadj voLFkh dh vksj ls fnukad 7-6-2003 dh cSBd ds 34 esa ls ek= 13 lnL;ksa ds uksVjh 'kiFk izkIr gq, gSa ftlesa ,d lnL; Jh vks ih f=ikBh dk c;ku nksuksa vksj gksus ds dkj.k og Lo;a esa fojks/kkHkk"kh gks tkrk gS lkFk gh izkIr vfHkys[kksa esa f'kdk;rdrkZx.k dks cksMZ vFkok lk/kkj.k lHkk dh rFkk dfFkr cSBdksa ds ,tsaMk dh rkehyh izekf.kr ugha gks ldh gSA**
7. A perusal of the above findings and the order dated 13.8.2003 shows that the Deputy Registrar has gone into the facts on record in detail and thereafter recorded a finding of fact that no genuine election was held on 7.6.2003.
8. In writ Jurisdiction this Court cannot go into findings of fact and it cannot interfere with the same. Even if there is some evidence to support the finding the High Court cannot interfere with a finding of fact on the ground that there is insufficient evidence. In writ Jurisdiction this Court does not act as a Court of First Appeal and hence it cannot interfere with the findings of fact of the Deputy Registrar that the election of 7.6.2003 was fake. The same view has been taken by the learned single Judge and we agree with his view.
9. Since the four years period expired on 9.6.2003 and no genuine election was held by then, the office bearers of the Board of Trustees ceased to hold office from that date. Hence we direct the District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar to forthwith appoint an Administrator of the Trust who will control and look after the Trust until fresh election which must be held by the Administrator as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.
10. As regard Special Appeal No. 543 of 2004 it is directed against the same judgment of the learned single Judge order dated 25.5.2004. The controversy before the learned single Judge was whether the application for membership of 15 persons had been rightly rejected by the Deputy Registrar or not. The learned single Judge held that the Deputy Registrar wrongly rejected the application of such 15 members. It is this finding which is challenged in this Special Appeal No. 543 of 2004.
11. Sri Ashok Khare, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the finding of learned single Judge in the Judgment dated 25.5.2004 is erroneous because under the Rules of the Constitution of the Trust (copy of which is Annexure-1 to the special appeal) to obtain membership it was necessary for the applicants to make a pre deposit of Rs. 500 at the time of the application for membership. Rule 3 (a) of the Rules of the Trust states as follows :
"The membership of the Trust will be open to all persons without distinction of caste or creed who pay Rs. 500 (Rupees five hundred) at least to qualify themselves for membership of the Trust. Each case of membership will have to be approved by the Board of Trustees.
In addition to the aforesaid lump sum of Rs. 500 each member of the Board of Trustees will be required to pay monthly subscription of Rs. 3 per month."
The finding of the Deputy Registrar is that the deposit of Rs. 500 by these 15 persons is subsequent to 31.5.2002 on which date the resolution accepting them as members was passed. We are of the opinion that whatever may have been the position earlier it is now an admitted position that these 15 persons have made the deposit of Rs. 500 each, and since we have ordered fresh election to be held by the Administrator (who shall be the District Magistrate, Kanpur, or an officer nominated by him) this point of non-deposit of Rs. 500 no longer survives. However, under Rule 3 (a) of the Constitution of the Trust in addition to deposit of Rs. 500 it is also necessary that the application for membership should be approved by the Board of Trustees before a person can be declared to be a member of the society. Since by this order we have appointed an administrator in place of the Board of Trustees in our opinion such administrator legally steps into the shoes of the Board of Trustees. Hence the question of approval of membership of these 15 persons shall be decided by the said administrator very expeditiously and before the election process starts.
12. In view of the above these special appeals are disposed of finally.
13. We make it clear that the parties concerned will be given an opportunity of hearing by the administrator appointed by the D.M. before deciding the membership of the society so that no one will have any grievance.
14. We make it further clear that the administrator will not be influenced by the impugned Judgment of the learned single Judge.