AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.—Heard Sri P.S. Baghel, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 3.
The challenge in this petition is to the order of the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Jaunpur dated 20th January, 2011 whereby he has proceeded to finalize the electoral college of a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 for the purpose of holding elections and the constitution of the Committee of Management under Sub-section (2) of Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860.
Sri P.S. Baghel submits that this decision completely nonsuits the claim of 80 members as set up by the Respondent No. 3 but at the same time, it proceeds to allow only such members who are presently living and available, and have been enrolled prior to 10th January, 1985 to participate in the proposed elections. The order of the Assistant Registrar is based on surmises and conjectures and by totally bypassing the impact of the order of the prescribed authority dated 2nd April, 2005 which has a direct bearing on the issue. Sri P.S. Baghel submits that in order to illustrate the cause of the Petitioners, the case of Rudra Pal Pandey has been categorically dealt with by the prescribed authority and it has been found, as a matter of fact, that according to the amended bye-laws, Mr. Rudra Pal Pandey had been rightly co-opted and was also functioning as an office-bearer of the Society, which happened in the life of Sri Bateshwar Nath Upadhyaya. The aforesaid finding is contained in the order of the Prescribed Authority dated 2nd April, 2005. He therefore submits that not only Rudra Pal Pandey but also such members, who have been enrolled in the year 1985 onwards, till the elections, which were found to be valid by the prescribed authority, cannot be non-suited by the Assistant Registrar as he cannot sit in appeal over the order of the Prescribed Authority.
Sri R.K. Ojha replying to the aforesaid submissions contends that it is for the first time that the Assistant Registrar has dealt with the issue of membership relating to the parental society namely Kisan National Education Trust and the findings of the Prescribed Authority are only in relation to the Sansthapak Mandal society which does not have any general body of its own. He therefore contends that the Sansthpak Mandal has no control, insofar as, the constitution of the general body is concerned or even otherwise the elections of the Committee of Management of G.B. Pant Society.
His submission is that the findings which have been recorded by the Assistant Registrar is based on facts that emerged before him and he has found that the membership fee etc. has not been deposited and even otherwise there is no indication of any compliance of the bye-laws that may establish that such members were ever enrolled as members of the general body. He therefore submits that the Assistant Registrar has adopted the right course to proceed to hold the elections from amongst the living members prior to 10th January, 1985.
It is further submitted by Sri R.K. Ojha that the elections are scheduled to be held on 15th February, 2011, i.e. tomorrow, and, therefore, this Court need not interfere with the election process.
Sri Baghel replying to the said submissions contends that this is a case of electoral fraud and non participation of a substantial number of members can materially affect the results of the elections. He relies on a division Bench judgment in the case of Rama Kant v. Assistant Registrar reported in 2009 (76) ALR 906.
Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, it is more then evident that the Assistant Registrar has completely ignored the impact of the order dated 2nd April, 2005, which prima facie in my view has a direct bearing on the issue relating to the membership of Kisan National Education Trust. In such a situation, ignoring a relevant material, which is with shape of an order passed by the Prescribed Authority might be detrimental for holding the very elections and that goes to the root of the matter.
Accordingly, let the elections that are scheduled for tomorrow be held and Sri R.K. Ojha may take only three days time to serve a copy of the counter affidavit to the learned Counsel for the Petitioners. Sri P.S. Baghel to have 48 hours time to file a rejoinder affidavit thereafter.
The matter shall come up as unlisted on Tuesday i.e. 22.02.2011.
Until further orders of this Court, the Assistant Registrar shall, after the elections are held, not declare the results thereof or register the list of office-bearers, except with the leave of the Court.