COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT, SMT. RAMADEVI SHIKSHA SAMITI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                       WRIT - C No. - 15174 of 2026

Committee Of Management, Smt. Ramadevi Shiksha
Samiti And Another                                            .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others
                                                            .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)        : Siddharth Khare, Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Respondent(s)        : C.S.C., Samarath Singh, Sankalp Narain

Court No. - 32
           HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Mohd.
Yasin, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri G.K. Singh, learned Senior
Advocate assisted by Ms. Bhavni Chaurasia, Advocate for Respondent-4.

2. It is a dispute of rival Committee of Management between petitioners and
Respondent-4 of Smt. Ramadevi Shiksha Samiti, which is running a Higher
Secondary School, namely, Smt. Ramadevi Uchchatar Madhyamik
Vidyalay, Panehra, Tehsil Atrauli, District Aligarh.

3. Manager of respective Committees are real brothers and dispute arose
when their father, Prem Singh, expired. There is a dispute about his date of
death also, whether it was 08.05.2020 or 05.04.2020 since two death
certificates bearing different dates of death were placed during proceedings.

4. Petitioners-Society have claimed that a casual vacancy on post of
President arose due to death of Prem Singh and on election, one Laxmi
Singh was elected as President for remaining term on basis of proceedings
dated 08.05.2020.

5. Subsequently vacancy arose due to death of one Raghubir Singh, Auditor,
was also filled through proceedings dated 10.10.2022 and one Smt. Geeta
was elected as Auditor.
                                                         WRIC No. 15174 of 2026
                                2


6. The Committee continued to run and no election took place after the
tenure of five years was concluded in the year 2022. A further bone of
contention was that on 25.07.2023 respective resignation was submitted by
Nathoo Singh, Manager; Dheeraj Lal, Treasurer; Smt. Geeta, Auditor; and,
Raghuvir Singh, Member from respective offices of Committee of
Management, which was accepted in meeting dated 25.07.2023 and further
in same meeting Dhreeraj Lal was elected as Manager, Smt. Geeta as
Treasurer, Rinku Singh as Auditor and Santosh as a Member of Committee
of Management.

7. It is further on record that petitioners have submitted an application dated
11.10.2023 for registration of list of Members and Office Bearers of
Committee of Management for the year 2023-24 on which Deputy Registrar
issued a notice dated 08.11.2023 addressed to Nathoo Singh of opposite
party to file objection, if any, however, no objection was filed and list of
Office Bearers for the year 2023-24 submitted by petitioners was registered.

8. Subsequently, list of Members and Office Bearers of Committee of
Management for the year 2025-26 with Laxmi Singh as President and
Dheeraj Lal as Manager was also registered by Deputy Registrar by means
of communication dated 25.08.2025.

9. Before aforesaid list was issued by Deputy Registrar, Nathoo Singh
(Respondent-4) claiming himself to be Manager of Committee of
Management filed a complaint dated 25.07.2025 before Deputy Registrar,
Firms, Societies & Chits, Agra. He also filed a subsequent application dated
20.09.2025 which was accompanied by proceedings of different dates from
09.03.2019 to 08.10.2022 as well as proceedings dated 02.09.2022 that
Committee of Management has elected Smt. Mamta Devi as a President and
Nathoo Singh as a Manager.
                                                         WRIC No. 15174 of 2026
                                3


10. On basis of aforesaid complaint, a notice was issued and it appears that
efforts for settlement between two brothers were failed and finally the
Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra passed an order dated
06.03.2026 whereby list of Office Bearers for the year 2023-24 and 2024-25
submitted by petitioners were cancelled and list of Office Bearers for the
year 2025-26 on basis of election dated 02.09.2022 as claimed by
Respondent-4 was directed to be registered as a valid list. This order is under
challenge before this Court.

11. Learned Senior Advocate for petitioners submits that in above referred
circumstances when there was a serious dispute between rival claim of
election of a Committee of Management, Deputy Registrar was not
authorized to decide said dispute on its own and it was incumbent upon
Deputy Registrar to make a reference to Prescribed Authority under Section
25(1) of Societies Registrar Act, 1860.

12. Learned Senior Advocate also submits that by way of impugned order
proceedings of petitioners' Committee of Management were set aside on
frivolous grounds and without entertaining any objection to election set up
by rival Committee of Management, i.e., Respondent-4, their list of Office
Bearers was considered to be a genuine list.

13. Learned Senior Advocate further submits that when list of Office Bearers
of petitioners' Society was submitted before Deputy Registrar, a notice was
issued to Respondent-4, however, no objection or rival proceeding of
election were placed.

14. Per contra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for Respondent-4,
referred impugned order that once Deputy Registrar after considering
documents available come to conclusion that claim set up by petitioners was
bogus and no genuine dispute arose, whereas election set up by Respondent-
4 was genuine, there was no mandatory requirement for Deputy Registrar to
refer the matter to Prescribed Authority.
                                                          WRIC No. 15174 of 2026
                                 4


15. Learned Senior Advocate refers the Memorandum of Association and
bye-laws framed under Societies Registration Act and specifically the
procedure to be adopted to fill up a casual vacancy arose that said vacancy
shall be filled by 2/3 majority of General Body and not by Members of
Committee of Management as claimed by the petitioners.

16. I have considered the aforesaid submissions and perused the material
available on record.

17. From a careful perusal of impugned order, it is evident that it has
assigned reasons to reach a conclusion that list submitted by petitioners'
Committee of Management and proceedings were bogus and due process
was not followed for the purpose of filling up casual vacancies. It also takes
note that proceeding to fill up the vacancy arose due to death of Prem Singh
was undertaken on 05.05.2020 whereas according to death certificate, Prem
Singh has expired on 08.05.2020. Further, proceedings undertaken by
petitioners' Committee of Management were found to be bogus and suffered
with fraud and election set up by Respondent-4 was accepted and their list of
Office Bearers was accordingly registered without much deliberation.

18. It will be also relevant to refer here that no specific finding was returned
so far as acceptance of resignation is concerned, i.e., the proceedings dated
25.07.2023 set up by petitioners.

19. Now the Court proceed to consider, whether in given circumstances such
nature of consideration as made by Deputy Registrar in impugned order
could be done or it was beyond it's jurisdiction as in such circumstances the
dispute ought to have been referred to Prescribed Authority under Section
25(1) of Societies Registration Act or not as well as under the garb of
consideration, whether Deputy Registrar could review it's earlier orders.
                                                        WRIC No. 15174 of 2026
                                5


20. At this stage, Court takes note of a judgment passed by a Division Bench
of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, Anjuman Kherul
Almin Allahganj and another vs. State of U.P. and others, 2014(1) ADJ
44 wherein various judgments on issue were considered and relevant part
thereof is mentioned hereinafter:

     "10. Both these provisions have been harmonised in the judgment
     of the Division Bench in All-India Council (Supra) where it was
     held as follows :

     ''Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act as amended by the
     State Legislature enacts a comprehensive code and creates a
     designated forum or tribunal for adjudication in a summary
     manner of all disputes or doubts in respect of the election or
     continuance in office of an office-bearer of such society. It also
     provides the grounds upon which the election of an office-bearer
     can be set aside. The procedure to be followed for filling up of the
     vacancies arising from the decisions rendered by the Prescribed
     Authority under Sub-section (i)of Section 25 has also been laid
     down (Section 25(2).)

     7. It will, therefore, be seen that insofar as disputes or doubts in
     respect of the election or continuance in office of the office-
     bearers of a society registered in Uttar Pradesh are concerned,
     the Legislature has created a specific forum and laid down an
     exhaustive procedure for determination of the same under Section
     25. There is no other provision, express or otherwise, providing
     for determination of such disputes specifically. It is settled law
     that where, as here, the Legislature creates a specific forum and
     lays an exhaustive procedure for determination of a particular
     class of disputes in respect of matters covered by the statute, such
     disputes can be determined only in that forum and in the manner
     prescribed thereunder and not otherwise. If, therefore, a dispute
     is raised with regard to the election or continuance in office of an
     office-bearer of a society registered in Uttar Pradesh, the same
     has to be decided only by the Prescribed Authority under Section
     25(1) and not by the Registrar, save, of course, to the decision
     of the Prescribed Authority being subject to the result of a
     civil suit.''
                                                                                             WRIC No. 15174 of 2026
                                                                     6


                                    21. In aforesaid circumstances, though Deputy Registrar is not mere a Post
                                    Office to refer any dispute amongst the election set up by rival Committee of
                                    Management to refer the matter to Prescribed Authority, however, when
                                    there are serious objections and it is likely that bye-laws and nature of
                                    proceedings has to be considered on basis of rival submissions and
                                    documents so much as that one of the rival election has to be rejected, it
                                    would be appropriate for Deputy Registrar to refer the matter to Prescribed
                                    Authority instead to decide the same itself.

                                    22. In the present case, the findings returned by Deputy Registrar are that the
                                    proceedings set up by petitioners were bogus but for that the objection of
                                    Respondent-4 were considered to large extent, therefore, there was a genuine
                                    dispute. Accordingly, Court finds that argument of learned Senior Advocate
                                    for petitioner has much force so far as jurisdiction is concerned. Therefore,
                                    in given set of circumstances, Court is of the view that impugned order was
                                    passed beyond jurisdiction of Deputy Registrar and is liable to be set aside.

                                    23. Court also takes note that a judgment placed by learned Senior Advocate
                                    for Respondent-4 in the case of Committee of Management of Rashtriya
                                    Junior High School (Society) vs. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies
                                    and Chits, Varanasi, 2005(3) UPLBEC 2817 would not be applicable since
                                    as referred above, in the present case there was a real cause of litigation and
                                    it was not a case that there was not even a shadow of real cause of litigation.

                                    24. In view of above, impugned order dated 06.03.2026 is hereby set aside
                                    and matter is referred to Prescribed Authority. The writ petition is
                                    accordingly disposed of.
                                    April 22, 2026
                                    AK
                                                                                   (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
AWADESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad