- (1.)RAKESH Tiwari, J. Heard Sri Jitendra Narain Rai, learned Coun sel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri A. K. Sachan, for respondent No. 3 and perused the record.
(2.)THIS petition has been filed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 14. 1. 2008 passed by the respon dent No. 2, which has been appended as Annexure 11 to the writ petition. A mandamus has also been sought for directing respondent No. 2 to register the list of Members of Committee of Management of the petitioner, which is appended as Annexure 12 to the writ petition. A further mandamus has been sought for directing respondent No. 2 to refer the dispute of election of the Committee of Management to respondent No. 3 the Prescribed Authority and till then the peti tioner Committee of Management be allowed to function accordingly.
By the impugned order dated 14. 1. 2008, the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Bareilly has disapproved the meeting of the General Body dated 25. 4. 2007, 26. 4. 2007 and 10. 6. 2007 as well as the list of office bearers, who are said to have been elected in the petitioner committee of management and on the contrary has also approved the election of the respondent No. 3 and list of the office bearers submitted of the rival committee of management in pursu ance thereof directing that office bearers be registered under Section 4 (1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860.

The petitioner has relied upon Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 in support of his contention that the matter ought to have been referred by the Assistant Registrar to the Prescribed Authority for adjudication.

(3.)SECTION 26 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 is as under: "the Prescribed Authority may, on a reference made to it by the Regis trar or by at least one-fourth of the members of a society registered in Uttar Pradesh, hear and decide in a summary manner any doubt or dispute in respect of the election or continuance in office of an office bearer of such society, and may pass such orders in respect thereof as it deems fit: Provided that the election of an office-bearer shall be set aside where the prescribed authority is satisfied - (a) that any corrupt practice has been committed by such office-bearer; or (b) that the nomination of any candidate has been improperly rejected; or (c) that the result of the election insofar it concerned such office-bearer has been materially affected by the improper acceptance of any nomination or by the improper reception, refusal or rejection of any vote or the reception of any vote which is void or by any non-compliance with the provisions or any rules of the society. Explanation I - A person shall be deemed to have committed a corrupt practice who directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person - (i) includes, or attempts to include, by fraud, intentional misrepresenta tion, coercion or threat of injury, any elector to give or to refrain from giving a vote in favour of any candidate, or any person to stand or not to stand as, or to withdraw or not to withdraw from being a candidate at the election; (ii) with a view to including any elector to give or to refrain from giving a vote in favour of any candidate, or to including any person to stand or not to stand as, or to withdraw or not to withdraw from being a candidate at the election, offers or gives any money, or valuable consideration, or any place or employment, or holds out any promise of individual advantage or profit to any person; (iii) abets (within the meaning of the Indian Penal Code) the doing of any of the acts specified in clauses (i) and (ii); (iv) induces or attempts to induce a candidate or elector to believe that he, or any person in whom he is interested, will become or will be rendered an object of divine displeasure or spiritual censure; (v) canvasses on grounds of caste, community, sect or religion; (vi) commits such other practice as the State Government may prescribe to be a corrupt practice. Explanation II - A promise of individual advantage or profit to a person includes a promise for the benefit of the person himself, or of any one in whom he is interested. Explanation III.- The State Government may prescribe the procedure for hearing and decision of doubts or disputes in respect of such elections and make provision in respect of any other matter relating to such elections for which insufficient provision exists in this Act or in the rules of the society. [inserted by Uttar Pradesh Act 13 of 1978, SECTION 4 (w. e. f. 27. 2. 1978)]. (2) Where by an order made under sub-section (1), an election is set aside or an office-bearer is held no longer entitled to continue in office or where the Registrar is satisfied that any election of office-bearers of a society has not been held within the time specified in the rules of that society, he may call a meeting of the general body of such society for electing such office-bearer or office bearers, and such meeting shall be presided over and be conducted by the Registrar or by any officer authorised by him in this behalf, and the provisions in the rules of the society relating to meetings and elections shall apply to such meeting and election with necessary modifica tions. (3) Where a meeting is called by the Registrar under sub-section (2), no other meeting shall be called for the purpose of election by any other author ity or by any person claiming to be an office-bearer of the society. Explanation.- For the purpose of this section, the expression "prescribed authority" means an officer or Court authorized in this behalf by the State Government by notification published in the official Gazette. "
Learned Counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon para 6 of the judg ment rendered in Kranti Kumar Chaturvedi and another v. District Inspector of Schools, Kanpur Dehat and others, 1995 (3) ESC 166 (All ). The relevant para graph 6 is extracted as under: "section 25 of the Act contemplates different situation. It is attracted only when there is no dispute in respect of registration of society or its re newal of certificate of registration but there is dispute between two rival par ties each of whom is claiming to be validly elected body. In such a situation the dispute between the two rival parties has to be referred for adjudication under Section 25 of the Act. Section 25 of the Act is also attracted when a , party challenges the illegality or otherwise of the election of particular set of office bearers of society on the grounds enumerated in Section 25 of the Act. Thus the dispute under Section 25 of the Act can only be referred for adjudication only when it is found that the registration of the society or its renewal is intact. In the present case, since the objection was that the appellants are not legally elected body and have obtained renewal of certificate of registra tion by practicing fraud, it was well within the jurisdiction and power of the Registrar to entertain such objection and decide the same. The decisions relied upon by the learned Counsel for the appellants in the case of Khapraha Educational Society and another (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the present case and is distinguishable. We are of the view that the order passed by the Registrar was well within his jurisdiction and the same is appealable under Section 12-D of the Act. "