Court No. - 54
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42778 of 2019 Petitioner :- Rajkumar And 16 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhakar Awasthi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.
Heard Shri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-Respondent.
Present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 5.12.2019 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra, respondent No.2, whereby election programme was declared for holding election of the Society under Section 25(2) of the Societies Registration Act and 23.12.2019 is the date fixed.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the impugned order has been passed exparte without hearing the petitioners.
The Division Bench of this Court after considering the judgement of the Apex Court as well as this Hon'ble Court has settled that the election process once started it should come to its logical conclusion. In support of his contention learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the Division Bench judgement in the case of Basant Prasad Srivastava and another v. State of U.P. and another reported in 1993(2) U.P.L.B.E.C. Page 1333 which is as follows :
"When once the election process starts, it must come to its logical conclusion. Once it comes to its logical conclusion by declaration of result of the election the aggrieved person may challenge the election by filing election petition or civil suit in accordance with law. In such a proceeding the election may not be set aside if the alleged illegality or irregularity has not materially affected the result of the election. Approach to Court at intermediate stages in the election is bound to result in an office either remaining vacant or being occupied by a person whose entitlement to hold the office has ceased. Neither is a happy situation. It is, therefore, desirable that the election process should end as early as possible and the declaration of result should not be deferred through repeated interim orders passed from time to time."
Since the election programme had already been notified, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the process of election. Petitioners have remedy to challenge the same after the election process is completed. Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra, respondent No.2 is directed to hear the petitioners before taking any decision for approving the election under Section 4 of the Societies Registration Act.
Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Order Date :- 20.12.2019 T. Sinha