Committee of Management, Swami Ram Narayan Acharya Shiksha Sansthan, Ballia and another vs Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits and another

D.P. Singh, J.

Heard Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Sri S.A. Jilani for the respondents.

This petition is directed against an order dated 24.12.2003 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agamgarh Region, Azamgarh refusing to register the names of the office bearers of the petitionerCommittee and registering the names of the respondents and issuing a certificate to that effect.

Swami Ram Narayan Acharya Shiksha Sansthan, Belthara Road in district Ballia is a duly registered Society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860.The Society runs a degree college of the same name which is affiliated to the Poorvanchal University, Jaunpur. Under the Byelaws, the election to the Committee of Management of the Society is held every five years. There was no dispute till the elections of 1998, however, for the fresh elections of 2003, the petitioners claimed to have been elected in the election held on 10.10.2003 and forwarded the list of office bearers to the Assistant Registrar for registering it under Section 4A of the Act and for issuance of a renewal certificate. The respondents also claimed elections where they were elected on 9.11.2003 and they also similarly placed their claim before the Assistant Registrar. The Assistant Registrar instead of referring the matter to the Prescribed Authority, after recording a finding that the petitioner had failed to produce the record of their elections, passed the impugned order.

Several arguments have been raised by the petitioners, but the principal argument is that the impugned order was passed without any reasonable opportunity to them.

It is not in dispute that 15.12.2003 was the date fixed for the petitioners to produce their documents and for their hearing. It is alleged in paragraph nos. 26 and 27 of the writ petition that when the President of the petitionersCommittee went to the office of the Assistant Registrar on 15.12.2003 along with his record, the Assistant Registrar was out of station and he was informed that he had gone to Allahabad and therefore, neither the record was deposited nor any hearing took place and without any further date being fixed the impugned order was passed. These allegations made in the writ petition have not been denied in the counteraffidavit filed by the State and sworn by the Assistant Registrar. In fact, it is explained that even though he was not present on the date fixed, the petitioner should have deposited the record with the clerk. In the opinion of the Court, the explanation is absurd. Under law, it is the Assistant Registrar who has to prima facie satisfy himself regarding the contesting claims after perusing the record and hearing the parties and if he was prima facie satisfied that there was a bonafide dispute, he could have referred it to the Prescribed Authority. Deposit of record with the Clerk would not amount to reasonable opportunity to the petitioner.

For the reasons given hereinabove, this petition succeeds and is allowed and the impugned order dated 24.12.2003 is hereby quashed.

However, the Assistant Registrar may take a fresh decision after examining the record of the contesting parties and offering them a reasonable opportunity.

Under the circumstances of the case, no order as to cost.

Writ petition allowed.