Allahabad High Court
COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT BABA RAGHUNANDAN DAS VIDYALAY VAISHNAV NAGAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court upheld the Deputy Registrar’s order, finding no illegality and dismissing the writ petition.
Summary
The Committee of Management of Baba Raghunandan Das Vidyalay challenged a Deputy Registrar order dated 23‑01‑2026 that cancelled the General Body member list for 2025‑26 and set aside the election held on 30‑07‑2023. Two writ petitions were filed, the first through the President with an affidavit from a non‑member, which the Court dismissed for lack of proper authorization. The second petition, filed by the Manager, argued that the Registrar exceeded his jurisdiction under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, by cancelling the election and the member list without the required documentary evidence. The respondents contended that the Registrar acted within Section 4‑B, which permits examination of the General Body list and that the petitioners failed to produce the necessary resolutions and affidavits to justify deletions and additions of members. The Court held that the Registrar’s inquiry was proper, the petitioners did not discharge the burden of proof, and the election conducted on a defective list could not be sustained. Consequently, the second writ petition was dismissed, leaving the Registrar’s order intact.
Issues considered
- The Deputy Registrar’s power under Section 4‑B of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 to cancel a General Body member list and an election.
- Whether the petitioners provided sufficient documentary evidence to justify deletions and additions to the member list.
- Whether the Registrar’s order was beyond jurisdiction for cancelling the election.
- Who bears the burden of proof in disputes over General Body membership lists.
Legislation cited
- Societies Registration Act, 1860 — s. 4-B(1), 4-B(2), 4-B(3)
Subjects
- societies law
- general body member list
- election validity
- Section 4‑B
- registrar power
- writ petition
- bye‑laws
- unauthorized affidavit
Judgment
Reserved on 28.04.2026
Delivered on 06.05.2026
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 10721 of 2026
Committee Of Management Baba …..Petitioner(s)
Raghunandan Das Vidyalay Vaishnav
Nagar And Another
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others …..Respondents(s)
Counsel for Petitioners(s) : Yogesh Kumar Saxena
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Alok Dwivedi, C.S.C.
Along with :
Writ - C No. 13322 of 2026:
Committee of Management and Another
1.
Versus
State of U.P. and 3 others
Court No. - 32
HON’BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. This is a bunch of two writ petitions whereby same order is under
challenge, i.e., an order dated 23.01.2026 passed by Deputy Registrar,
Firms, Societies and Chits, Kanpur Region, Kanpur.
2
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
2. First writ petition, being Writ-C No. 10721 of 2026 was filed on
12.03.2026 by Committee of Management, Baba Raghunandan Das
Vidyalay Vaishnav Nagar, Billhor, Kanpur Nagar through its President,
Dr. Rajendra Katiyar and it is supported by an affidavit sworn by one,
Gyanendra Awasthi declaring himself to be a pairokar without any
further declaration that under what capacity he is connected with
petitioners’ Committee of Management. The writ petition is
accompanied by a resolution dated 08.02.2026 whereby the said
deponent was authorized to do pairavi. There is an earlier resolution
dated 02.09.2025 whereby Dr. Rajendra Katiyar was authorized to file
writ petition instead of Sri Ashok Kumar Katiyar, the Manager of
Committee of Management.
3. Second writ petition, being Writ-C No. 13322 of 2026 was filed
on 28.03.2026, i.e., subsequent to above referred writ petition by same
Committee of Management but now through its Manager, Ashok Kumar
Katiyar. This writ petition is accompanied by an affidavit of said
petitioner. In this writ petition there is no reference, whether petitioner
was authorized to file this writ petition even after earlier writ petition
was filed challenging same impugned order through its President.
4. The aforesaid circumstances are explicit example that it was
necessary that a conscious decision be taken by Committee of
Management not only to challenge any adverse order but to authorize a
person, i.e., Office Bearer or Member of Committee of Management as
per bye laws. In no circumstance a stranger can be appointed to sworn an
affidavit on behalf of Committee of Management and its Office Bearers
since in no circumstance it can be assumed that he would be aware with
affairs of Committee of Management.
5. In aforesaid circumstances, both writ petitions can be dismissed
with cost though at this stage the Court is dismissing only first petition,
i.e., Writ-C No. 10721 of 2026 filed by Committee of Management
through its President since it is accompanied by an affidavit of a stranger
though the Court takes note that there was an authorization but said
3
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
authorization cannot be treated to be a proper authorization being
contrary to its bye-laws whereby Manager is authorized to represent
Committee of Management in legal cases. A cost of Rs. 50,000/- each is
imposed on the President of Committee of Management and deponent of
referred writ petition.
6. Now only the second writ petition, i.e., Writ-C No. 13322 of 2026
survives wherein petitioners are represented by Sri Prabhakar Awasthi,
learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri A.N. Pandey and Sri Y.K.
Saxena, Advocates, Respondents-1 and 2 are represented by learned
Standing Counsel and Respondents-3 and 4 are represented by Sri V.K.
Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Alok Dwivedi, Advocate.
7. This is a case arising out of a dispute of list of Members of
General Body of petitioners’ Committee of Management. Earlier a
dispute of list of Members was considered by this Court in Writ-C No.
36738 of 2025, wherein an order dated 04.09.2025 was challenged
whereby the Deputy Registrar, Kanpur has passed an order that a list
dated 30.07.2023 submitted by Ashok Kumar Katiyar (Petitioner herein)
being last election of Committee of Management on basis of list of 69
Members of General Body was found to be defective and accordingly
election for year 2025-26 which was earlier registered on 30.07.2025
submitted by Sri Ashok Kumar Katiyar, Manager was also cancelled on
a complaint of private respondents.
8. Aforesaid Writ-C No. 36738 of 2025 was finally disposed of vide
an order dated 20.11.2025 and this Court has directed Deputy Registrar,
Kanpur to pass a fresh order after hearing parties and decide the dispute
of list of Members. Accordingly a fresh order dated 23.01.2026 was
passed whereby a list submitted by Sri Ashok Kumar Katiyar (petitioner
herein) of the years 2020-21 and 2025-26 were again found defective
and list of Members of General Body for the year 2025-26 submitted by
petitioners was not approved and list dated 20.06.2017 submitted by
earlier Manager, Sri Shiv Nath Katiyar was declared to be valid. Said
order is impugned herein and it’s relevant part is mentioned hereinafter:
4
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
"मेरे ्ቛारा उभयप्ቌो को सुना गया तथा प्ቔावली में उपलब्ध
अभिभलेखो सहि त ्ቚस्तुत साቌኚयो का भलीभांतित परिरशीलन हिकया गया।
संस्था के तत्कालीन ्ቚबन्धक ्ቦी भिशवनाथ कहि+यार ्ቛारा ्ቚस्तुत
शुल्क व ्ቚप्ቔो के आधार पर संस्था का नवीनीकरण हि/नांक 23.09.2017 को
हिकया गया था। तत्कालीन ्ቚबन्धक ्ቦी भिशवनाथ कहि+यार ्ቛारा संस्था के
नवीनीकरण ेतु ्ቚस्तुत अपने ्ቚत्यावे/न हि/नांक 20.06.2017 के माध्यम से
संस्था की 59 स/स्यीय साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2016-17 ्ቚस्तुत की
गयी थी। जि7समें कुल 56 स/स्यो को 7ीहिवत ोने का उ्ቤेख हिकया गया था।
उभयप्ቌो के मध्य उपरो्ሹ स/स्यता सूची को लेकर हिववा/ न ीं ।ै ्ቦी
भिशवनाथ कहि+यार ्ቛारा संस्था के नवीनीकरण ेतु पुनः अपना ्ቚत्यावे/न
हि/नांक 19.08.2020 ्ቚस्तुत हिकया गया था। जि7सके ्ቅम में संस्था का
नवीनीकरण ्ቚमाण प्ቔ हि/नांक 03.09.2020 हिनग5 त हिकया गया था। 7ोहिक
हि/नांक 31.07.2020 से 05 व्ቧ> के लिलये हिवतिध मान्य र ा।
्ቦी अशोक कुमार कहि+यार ्ቛारा अपने प्ቔ हि/नांक 27.06.2025 के
माध्यम से संस्था की ्ቚबन्ध सहिमतित व साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2025-26
पं7ीकृत हिकये 7ाने के अनुरोध के साथ ्ቚस्तुत की गयी। जि7से काया5लय ्ቛारा
हि/नांक 30.06.2025 के आ/ेश के माध्यम से इस शत5 के साथ पं7ीकृत हिकया
गया हिक ्ቚस्तुत ्ቚप्ቔों में कोई तथ्य भिEपाने या गलत तथ्य ्ቚस्तुत हिकये 7ाने
की बात भहिवष्य में यहि/ ्ቚकाश में आती ै तो इसका पूण5 उ्ቈर/ातियत्व आपका
ोगा तथा पं7ीकृत अभिभलेख पं7ीकरण की तितभिथ से अमान्य एवं हिवतिध शून्य
ोगें।
उभयप्ቌो के मध्य हिववा/ की ቝኌस्थतित 69 स/स्यीय साधारण सभा की
सूची व्ቧ5 2020-21 व पं7ीकृत की गयी साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2025-26
को लेकर ।ै ्ቦी अशोक कुमार कहि+यार डा० रा7ेन््ቖ कहि+यार का /ावा ै हिक
उपरो्ሹ 69 स/स्यीय साधारण सभा की सूची को आपके काया5लय में
तत्कालीन ्ቚबन्धक ्ቦी भिशवनाथ कहि+यार ्ቛारा अपने आवे/न प्ቔ हि/नांक
19.08.2020 के माध्यम से ्ቚस्तुत हिकया गया था। 7बहिक भिशकायतकता5गण
्ቦी योगेन््ቖ जिस कहि+यार की भिशकायते य ै हिक उपरो्ሹ 69 स/स्यीय
साधारण सभा की सूची को तत्कालीन ्ቚबन्धक ्ቦी भिशवनाथ कहि+यार ्ቛारा
अपने आवे/न प्ቔ हि/नांक 19.08.2020 के माध्यम से ्ቚस्तुत न ीं हिकया गया
ै तथा य कथन हिकया गया ै कभिथत 69 स/स्यीय साधारण सभा की सूची
व्ቧ5 2020-21 व 51 स/स्यीय साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2025-26 में ्ቦी
अशोक कुमार कहि+यार ्ቛारा फाड करके 21 नये स/स्यो के नाम हिबना हिकसी
्ቚहि्ቅया को अपनाये ु ए 7ोड़ हि/या गया ै तथा 19 आ7ीवन संर्ቌक स/स्यो
को +ा हि/या गया ै 7ोहिक पूण5तयाः अवैधाहिनक ै। उनके ्ቛारा य अनुरोध
5
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
हिकया गया ै हिक व्ቧ5 2020-21 एवं 2025-26 की साधारण सभा में 21 नये
अवैध स/स्यो के नाम +ाते ु ए 19 पुराने व वैध आ7ीवन स/स्यो के नाम
7ोड़ते ु ए साधारण सभा घोहि्ቧत की 7ाये। अपने कथनो के समथ5 न में ्ቦी
योगेन््ቖ िሺस कहि+यार ्ቛारा मो० सई/ अ म/ इलिलयास, ्ቦी 7ावे/ कमर
रिर7वी, ्ቦी शा/ाब ु सैन, ्ቦी योगेन््ቖ कुमार कहि+यार के नो+री शपथप्ቔ
्ቚस्तुत हिकये गये जि7समें उनके ्ቛारा य कथन हिकया गया ै हिक हिबना सूचना
एवं ए7ेण्डा कराये तथा उनको हिबना सूतिचत हिकये उन् े स/स्यता से +ा हि/या
गया ।ै उनकी स/स्यता को ब ाल हिकया 7ाये। ्ቦी /या शंकर हिम्ቦ का नो+री
शपथप्ቔ हि/नांक 20.08.2025 भी ्ቚस्तुत हिकया गया जि7समें उनके ्ቛारा स्वयं
को 7ीहिवत ोने की घो्ቧणा की गयी ।ै
काया5लय आ/ेश हि/नांक 30.06.2025 के माध्यम से ्ቦी अशोक
कुमार कहि+यार ्ቛारा संस्था के ्ቚबन्धक की जिै सयत से ्ቚस्तुत 51 स/स्यीय
साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2025-26 को पं7ीकृत हिकया गया था। जि7समें य
/ावा हिकया गया था हिक व्ቧ5 2020-21 की 69 स/स्यीय साधारण सभा की
सूची में से मृतको को अलग करते ु ए तथा मा्ቔ 02 नये स/स्य 7ोड़े गये ।ै
य ाँ पर य उ्ቤेखनीय ै हिक उपरो्ሹ 69 स/स्यीय साधारण सभा की सूची
को लेकर तत्समय कोई भिशकायत ्ቚा् न ी थी। काया5लय में व्ቧ5 2020-21
की साधारण सभा की सूची को लेकर संस्था के वैध स/स्यो ्ቛारा अपनी
आपलि्ቈयां ्ቚस्तुत की गयी। जि7नमे से कतितपय स/स्यो ्ቛारा जि7न् े व्ቧ5 2020-
21 की साधारण सभा की सूची में न ी /शा5या गया ,ै ्ቛारा अपने नो+री
शपथप्ቔ ्ቚस्तुत करते ु ए स्वयं को स/स्यता से +ाये 7ाने को गलत बताया
गया ै तथा य कथन हिकया गया ै हिक इस सम्बन्ध में कोई भी ए7ेण्डा 7ारी
न ीं हिकया गया ै व कोई भी मीिሡ+ग न ीं ु ई ।ै उनके ्ቛारा अपनी स/स्यता
को ब ाल हिकये 7ाने का अनुरोध हिकया गया ।ै ्ቚा् भिशकायतो के ्ቅम में
उभयप्ቌो को सुनकर भिशकायतों का हिनस्तारण काया5लय आ/ेश हि/नांक
04.09.2025 के माध्यम से हिनस्तारण हिकया गया था। जि7सके हिवरू्ቍ मा० उ्ሴ
न्यायालय इला ाबा/ में रिर+ यातिचका संख्या 36738/2025 योजि7त की गयी
थी। जि7सपर मा० उ्ሴ न्यायालय ्ቛारा पारिरत अपने आ/ेश हि/नांक
20.11.2025 के माध्यम से काया5लय आ/ेश हि/नांक 04.09.2025 को
अपास्त करते ु ए ्ቚकरण को हिनस्तारिरत हिकये 7ाने के हिन/Zश हि/ये गये ।ै
य भी उ्ቤेखनीय ै हिक साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2015-16 जि7से
तत्कालीन ्ቚबन्धक ्ቦी भिशवनाथ कहि+यार ्ቛारा संस्था के नवीनीकरण के
समय काया5लय में ्ቚस्तुत हिकया गया था को लेकर उभयप्ቌो के मध्य कोई भी
हिववा/ न ीं ।ै उभयप्ቌो के मध्य 69 स/स्यीय साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5
2020-21 7ोहिक तत्कालीन ्ቚबन्धक ्ቦी भिशवनाथ कहि+यार ्ቛारा स्ता्ቌरिरत
6
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
,ै को लेकर ै तथा इसी ्ቅम में पं7ीकृत की गयी साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5
2025-26 के सम्बन्ध में भी भिशकायते ्ቚा् ।ै काया5लय ्ቛारा व्ቧ5 2020-21
की साधारण सभा की सूची को सोसा०रजि7०अतिध० 1860 की धारा 4 बी के
अन्तग5 त पूं7ीकृत न ीं हिकया गया ।ै भिशकायतकता5गणो ्ቛारा /ावा हिकया गया
हिक हिनብኌववा/ साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2015-16 के 19 आ7ीवन संर्ቌक
स/स्यो को व्ቧ5 2020-21 एवं 2025-26 की साधारण सभा से हिबना हिकसी
्ቚहि्ቅया को अपनाये +ा हि/या गया ै तथा हिबना हिकसी ्ቚहि्ቅया को अपनाये
21 नये अवैध स/स्यो को 7ोड़ हि/या गया ।ै भिशकायतकता5गणो की उपरो्ሹ
भिशकायतो का हिवहिन्ቐय अधो स्ता्ቌरी ्ቛारा रिर+ यातिचका संख्या
36738/2025 में मा० उ्ሴ न्यायालय ्ቛारा पारिरत आ/ेश हि/नांक 20.11.2025
के अनुपालन में हिकया 7ाना अपेति्ቌत ।ै
सोसा०रजि7०अतिध० 1860 की धारा- 4 बी के ्ቚावधान हिनम्नवत -ै
4-B. (1) At the time of registration/renewal of a society, list of
members of General Body of that society shall be filed with the
Registrar mentioning the name, father's name, address and
occupation of the members. The Registrar shall examine the
correctness of the list of members of the General Body of such
society on the basis of the register of members of the General
Body and minutes book thereof, cash book, receipt book of
membership fee and bank pass book of the society.
(2) If there is any change in the list of members of the General
Body of the society referred to in sub-section (1), on account of
induction, removal, registration or death of any member, a
modified list of members of General Body, shall be filed with the
Registrar, within one month from the date of change.
(3) The list of members of the General Body to be filed with the
Registrar under this section shall be signed by two office bearers
and two executive members of the society.
Amendment of section 4-B:-
For sub-section (2) of section 4-B of the principal Act, the
following sub-section shall be substituted, namely:-
(2) If there is any change in the list of members of the General
Body of the society referred to in sub-section (1), on account of
7
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
induction, removal, registration or death of any member, a
modified list of members of General Body. shall be filed with the
Registrar, within one month from the date of change.
Any change in the list of General Body shall not be valid unless
it is approved by the Managing Body.
्ቦी अशोक कुमार कहि+यार व ्ቦी रा7ेन््ቖ कहि+यार ्ቛारा व्ቧ5 2020-21
की 69 स/स्यीय साधारण सभा की सूची को वैध बताया 7ा र ा ।ै 7बहिक
्ቚा् भिशकायतो से य हिवहि/त ै हिक संस्था की हिनብኌववा/ साधारण सभा की
सूची व्ቧ5 2015-16 में /ቦኌशत व 7ीहिवत कई स/स्यो को +ाते ु ए तथा कुE
नये स/स्यो को 7ोड़कर साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2020-21 गहि^त /शा5यी
गयी ।ै इस ्ቚकार से हिकये गये परिरवत5 नों के सम्बन्ध में सोसा०रजि7०अतिध०
1860 की धारा 4 बी में /ቦኌशत संस्था के मूल अभिभलेखों का परी्ቌण की गयी
भिशकायतो के आलोक में हिकया 7ाना आवश्यक ो 7ाता ै तथा इस बात की
भी पुहि` संस्था के मूल अभिभलेखो से हिकया 7ाना आवश्यक ोता ै हिक
परिरवत5 नो को लेकर हिनयमानुसार अनुमो/न संस्था की ्ቚबन्ध सहिमतित से हिकया
गया ै अथवा न ी। याचीगण सोसा०रजि7०अतिध० 1860 की धारा 4 बी के
्ቚावधानो के अन्तग5 त व्ቧ5 2020-21 की साधारण सभा में हिकये गये परिरवत5 नो
की शु्ቍता की 7ांच ेतु वांभिEत संस्था के मूल अभिभलेख धारा 4 बी (1) में
हिकया गया ,ै को ्ቚस्तुत न ी कर सके ।ै 7बहिक साधारण सभा सम्बन्धी
स्वयं के /ावो की वैधता को ्ቚमाभिणत करने का /ातियत्व याचीगणो में ी हिनहि त
।ै वቦኌणत ቝኌस्थतित में साधारण सभा की 69 स/स्यीय साधारण सभा की सूची
व्ቧ5 2020-21 की शु्ቍता याचीगण ्ቚमाभिणत न ी कर सके ै तथा इसी ्ቅम में
काया5लय ्ቛारा पं7ीकृत साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2025-26 की शु्ቍता भी
्ቚमाभिणत न ीं ोती ।ै
उपरो्ሹ तथ्यो एवं उनकी हिववेचना के आधार पर याचीगणों / डा०
रा7ेन््ቖ कहि+यार, ्ቦी अशोक कुमार कहि+यार के साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5
2020-21 व 2025-26 को लेकर हिकये गये /ावे बल ीन ोने के कारण
अमान्य हिकये 7ाते ै तथा काया5लय ्ቛारा पं7ीकृत साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5
2025-26 को एत्ቛारा हिनरस्त हिकया 7ाता ।ै परिरणामस्वरूप उनकी हिनवा5चन
काय5 वा ी हि/नांक 30.07.2023 भी अमान्य ै तथा तत््ቅम में पं7ीकृत ्ቚबन्ध
सहिमतित की सूची व्ቧ5 2025-26 को भी अमान्य घोहि्ቧत हिकया 7ाता ।ै
काया5लय प्ቔावली पर उपलब्ध ्ቚप्ቔों एवं भिशकायतकता5 एवं याचीगणों
के ्ቛारा ्ቚस्तुत ्ቚप्ቔों के आधार पर ्ቚथम दृष््ा काया5लय प्ቔावली पर
उपलब्ध साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2020-21 की पुहि` हिकसी भी अभिभलेखों
8
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
के ्ቛारा न ीं ो सकी ।ै ऐसी ቝኌस्थतित में परिरቝኌस्थतित7न्य साቌኚयों एवं उभयप्ቌों
के मध्य हिववा/ ीन साधारण सभा की सूची व्ቧ5 2016-17 7ो काया5लय
प्ቔावली के पृ् संख्या-92 व 93 पर उपलब्ध ,ै जि7से पूव5 ्ቚबन्धक ्ቦी
भिशवनाथ कहि+यार ्ቛारा काया5लय में हि/नांक 20.06.2017 को ्ቚस्तुत हिकया
गया ,ै को अनቝኌन्तम रूप से मान्य घोहि्ቧत हिकया 7ाता ।ै
तनुसार रिर+ यातिचका संख्या 36738/2025 में मा० उ्ሴ न्यायालय
्ቛारा पारिरत आ/ेश हि/नांक 20.11.2025 के अनुपालन में ्ቚकरण को
हिनस्तारिरत हिकया 7ाता ।ै " (Emphasis supplied)
9. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioners submitted that
Deputy Registrar has no power to review its earlier order and by
reviewing it, he has committed a legal error. Deputy Registrar by means
of impugned order has not only cancelled the list of Members of General
Body of the year 2025-26 but also cancelled the election conducted on
30.07.2023 and disapproved the list of Members of Committee of
Management for the year 2025-26. Said directions were not only
contrary to material on record but beyond the jurisdiction also since
there is no provision to cancel entire list of Members of General Body.
10. Learned Senior Advocate by referring Section 4-B of Societies
Registration Act, 1860 submitted that Registrar can examine the
correctness of list of General Body of a Society on basis of register of
Members of said Body and minutes book thereof, cash book, receipt
book of membership fee and bank pass book of Society, however, in
impugned order there is no such consideration.
11. Per contra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for Respondents-3
and 4 has supported the impugned order that it was passed strictly in
compliance of provisions of Section 4-B of Societies Registration Act. It
was incumbent upon petitioners to submit documents, such as, resolution
that how the list of 59 Members of General Body of 2016-17, was
increased to 69 in the year 2021 and subsequently why name of 10
Members were deleted and 11 new Members were added. However, no
document was placed on record before concerned respondents, therefore,
there is no illegality in impugned order.
9
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
12. I have considered the aforesaid submissions and perused the
record.
13. On basis of above referred facts, there is no dispute to the list of
Members of General Body of petitioners-Committee of Management of
the year 2015-16 of 59 Members with further disclosure that three
Members were died, i.e., a final list of 56 Members.
14. The next election of General Body appears to be conducted on
19.08.2020 on basis of said list only and registration was renewed from
31.07.2020 to 31.07.2025, i.e., for five years. In between petitioners
have conducted an election of Committee of Management on 30.07.2023
on basis of a list of 69 Members of General Body. This list is germane of
dispute.
15. According to petitioners, name of dead Members and Members
who have not paid Membership fees or remained absent in meetings
were removed and some new Members were added and subsequently a
list of 69 Members of General Body and later on a list of 51 Members of
General Body of 2025-26 was presented which has finally deleted names
of 19 deceased/ disqualified Members and 21 Members were newly
inducted.
16. In aforesaid circumstances, an order dated 04.09.2025 was passed
whereby election dated 30.07.2023 was not declared valid and
accordingly list of 2025-26 was also cancelled as at that stage also
petitioners have not submitted relevant documents in support of deletion
of Members as well as inclusion of Members.
17. Said order was challenged before this Court by way of filing Writ-
C No. 36738 of 2025 and impugned order dated 04.09.2025 was set
aside on ground that petitioners were not given ample opportunity to
place their case and said order was passed only on basis of contentions
of complainant.
18. In aforesaid circumstances, a fresh order dated 23.01.2026 was
passed after hearing both parties and earlier order was reiterated that
10
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
petitioners were failed to provide relevant documents that how names of
19 Members were deleted being deceased/ disqualified and how names
of 21 Members were newly inducted.
19. The contention of learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of
petitioners is mainly that in the garb of fresh consideration under Section
4-B of Societies Registration Act, not only list of 69 Members of
General Body was found to be incorrect but election conduction on its
basis was also cancelled which was beyond the jurisdiction of Deputy
Registrar under Section 4-B and for that there must be another
proceeding.
20. Per contra, crux of argument of learned Senior Advocate
appearing for private respondents is that since petitioners were not able
to show requisite documents in order to prove how new Members were
inducted as well as that even the Members who were not dead were
shows as dead, therefore, Deputy Registrar has rightly passed impugned
order.
21. In aforesaid circumstances, the Court takes note of Section 4-B of
Societies Registration Act, 1860, which has already referred in earlier
part of this judgment that Registrar can examine the correctness of list of
General Body of a Society on basis of register members of said Body
and minutes book thereof, cash book, receipt book of membership fee
and bank pass book of Society.
22. Earlier when list was registered there is no reference, whether
such exercise was undertaken and list was registered with a specific
condition that if subsequently it came to knowledge that there was
improper deletion and induction of Members, then order can be recalled,
therefore, any argument that Deputy Registrar has no power to recall its
order is incorrect.
23. In aforesaid circumstances, now the Court has to see, whether
petitioners who have to discharge the burden of proof that exercise for
induction of new Members was undertaken by a due process as well as
11
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
name of only dead Members were deleted have discharged the burden or
not.
24. There is a specific affidavit of a Member, whose name was deleted
on ground that he expired, whereby he has declared that he is still alive,
which has been specifically mentioned in impugned order that one Daya
Shankar Mishra by a notarized affidavit dated 20.08.2025 has declared
that he is alive. This declaration has not been denied in writ petition
except in paragraph no. 31 that his name was deleted on account of non
deposit of yearly subscription. However, petitioners have not referred
any such clause in bye laws that if a Member failed to deposit yearly
subscription, his life Membership can be cancelled. Therefore, the reason
referred in para 31 of writ petition itself does not sustain and proceeding
to that effect is also not placed on record.
25. Similarly, petitioners have not annexed any document in support
of their claim about induction of 19 new Members. Neither proceeding
was placed before this Court nor before Deputy Registrar, as specifically
mentioned in impugned order and for the sake of repetition relevant
finding in this regard as mentioned in impugned order is reproduced
hereinafter:
"याचीगण सोसा०रजि7०अतिध० 1860 की धारा 4 बी के ्ቚावधानो के अन्तग5 त
व्ቧ5 2020-21 की साधारण सभा में हिकये गये परिरवत5 नो की शु्ቍता की 7ांच
ेतु वांभिEत संस्था के मूल अभिभलेख धारा 4 बी (1) में हिकया गया ,ै को
्ቚस्तुत न ी कर सके ।ै "
26. There is no specific denial to said finding so much as that it can be
considered perverse as well as, as referred above, petitioners have not
placed any document. The Court also takes note of averments made in
para 31 of writ petition that name of 19 life Members were not shown in
the list of 2014-15 though it is not specifically denied that their names
were recorded in list of 2015-16 and this is also not the reason for their
removal.
27. Court also takes note of a communication dated 11.09.2025
wherein an objection was filed that names of 11 Members were deleted
12
Writ C No. 10721 of 2026
in terms of Clause 6-Ga of bye laws since they have failed to deposit
subscription for their Membership and remained absent without
information. However, Court finds that Clause 6-Ga does not provide
any reason for deletion of name, rather it provides how a new Member
of General Body would become eligible to cast vote.
28. So far as Clause 16-Gha of bye laws is concerned, it provides that
in case any Member remained absent in three continuous meeting of
General Body, he would be an ineligible for becoming a Member.
However, even in such condition there must be a proposal adopted by
2/3 Members of General Body but there is no document to this effect.
29. Therefore, the Court finds that Deputy Registrar while conducting
inquiry about deletion of name of life Members and induction of new
Members, in absence of relevant documents has not committed any
illegality when such disputed list was found defective and since election
was conducted on a defective list, therefore, the same cannot be legally
sustainable and it was rightly set aside by impugned order.
30. In view of above, I do not find any reason to interfere with
impugned order. The second writ petition, i.e., Writ-C No. 13322 of
2026, is also accordingly dismissed.
May 06, 2026 (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
AK
Digitally signed by :-
AWADESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…