THE COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT KISAN EDUCATION TRUST AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

    HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                  WRIT - C No. - 15893 of 2026




The Committee Of Management Kisan
Education Trust And 2 Others                      .....Petitioner(s)
                             Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others
                                                  .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)      : Ratnakar        Upadhyay,      Sr.
                                 Advocate
Counsel for Respondent(s)      : C.S.C.

Court No. - 38


            HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.

1.Heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri
Shivendu Ojha, learned counsel, for the petitioners, Sri Ashok
Khare, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Aditendra
Singh, learned counsel, for Respondent No. 3; and the learned
Standing Counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2.

2. Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel, assailing the order
dated 24.09.2025, by which the list of the Sansthapak Mandal
for the year 2025-26, consisting of seven members, was
registered, has submitted by placing reliance on the
memorandum of the Sansthapak Mandal, more specifically on
Clause 1(d) of the Rules and Regulations of the Sansthapak
Mandal, which provides that in the event of a vacancy caused
by the death of any member, it shall be filled by a capable
member of his Society. He has also submitted that the
registered list, does not consist of members of the family or
their legal representatives.

3. He has further relied upon the list of membership, finalized
vide the order dated 20.01.2011, to submit that the members of
the Sansthapak Mandal do not include any of the members who
                                                           WRIC No. 15893 of 2026
                               2


were declared valid members vide the order dated 20.01.2011.
He has also relied upon the list registered on 11.04.2005 for the
year 2005-06 to submit that, apart from Sri Vinod Kumar
Upadhyay, no members who can be said to be legal heirs or
members of the family, have been included in the list for the
year 2025-26.

4. Per contra, Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel, has
submitted that the petitioners have not assailed an identical list
which was also registered for the year 2024–25; and
accordingly they cannot be permitted to challenge the list of
2025-26.

5. He has further objected to the maintainability, of the writ
petition on the strength of the proviso to Section 4(1-A) of the
Societies Registration Act, 1860, wherein an appeal against the
impugned order may be preferred before the Commissioner of
the Division within whose jurisdiction the headquarters of the
society lies, within one month from the date of communication
of the order.

6. For ready reference the proviso to Section 4(1A) of the
Societies Registration Act, 1860 is reproduced below:-

"(1A) An appeal against an order made under this section may be
preferred to Commission of the Division in whose jurisdiction the
headquarter of the Society l within one month from the date of
communication of such order.
Provided that the appellate authority may admit an appeal after the
expiry of su period if the appellant satisfies the appellate authority that he
had sufficient cause not preferring the appeal within such period.
Uttar Pradesh Act 8 of 2022, s. 3 (w.e.f. 7-7-2022)"

7. In response to the aforesaid arguments, Sri R.K. Ojha,
learned Senior Counsel, placed before this Court a judgment
dated 26.03.2012, passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8181
of 2011, (Kisan National Education Trust & Another v.
Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies & Chits and Others),
wherein this Court recorded categorical findings with respect to
the 47 members inducted pursuant to the resolution dated
                                                  WRIC No. 15893 of 2026
                          3


20.08.1985 and, while discarding the same, issued a direction
to the Assistant Registrar to proceed to declare the elections, so
as to enable the office-bearers so elected to take charge.

8. He has further submitted that, in pursuance of the said
judgment of this Court dated 26.03.2012, lists were
continuously registered for the years 2012–13, 2013–14,
2014–15, 2016–17, 2017–18, and lastly for the year 2022–23.

9. He has also submitted that from the said record, it is evident
that neither the names shown in the list of the Sansthapak
Mandal for the year 2005–06 nor those for the year 2025–26,
include members from the Kisan National Education Trust; and
as such, he submits that there are no disputed questions of
facts, warranting relegation of the petitioners, to an alternative
remedy.

10. However, Sri Ashok Khare has raised a serious dispute
with regard to the aforesaid facts, namely, whether the
members registered for the year 2025–26 are members of the
family or not, and as such he submits that the only efficacious
remedy is by way of the alternative remedy, of filing an Appeal
as it involves disputed questions of fact.

11. In the rejoinder, Sri R.K. Ojha has submitted that he has
also filed a detailed objection dated 15.03.2024 before the
Assistant Registrar, but the same has been completely ignored,
and the Assistant Registrar has proceeded to register the
impugned list for the year 2025–26. He fairly submits that in
case the said objections, filed on 15.03.2024, are duly
considered by the Appellate Authority and principles of natural
justice are adhered to, he has no objection in filing the appeal,
subject to relaxation of the period of limitation, on the
aforesaid proposition. Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior
Counsel has no objection to the same.

12. In view of the aforesaid, and by consent of the parties, the
Appellate Authority is directed to consider the objections of the
                                                                                         WRIC No. 15893 of 2026
                                                                  4


                                        petitioners dated 15.03.2024 as mentioned hereinabove, by
                                        adhering to the principles of natural justice and strictly in
                                        accordance with law, in case the petitioners file an appeal
                                        under the proviso to Section 4(1-A) of the Act of 1860, within
                                        a period of 15 days from today.

                                        13. It is also provided that, if such an appeal under the proviso
                                        to Section 4(1-A) of the Act of 1860 is filed within a period of
                                        15 days from today, the Appellate Authority shall proceed to
                                        decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of
                                        two months. However, it is made clear that the appeal shall not
                                        be rejected solely on the ground of limitation. No other
                                        arguments or prayer, has been pressed by the petitioners

                                        14. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition
                                        is disposed off at the admission stage, by the consent of the
                                        parties.




                                                                                 (Siddharth Nandan,J.)
                                        May 6, 2026
                                        piyush




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