Allahabad High Court
COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT SHIV PARVATI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- SIDDHARTH NANDAN
Holding
The petition is dismissed because an alternative statutory appeal under Section 12-D(2) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 is available.
Summary
The petitioners, Committee of Management of Shiv Parvati Society, challenged an order cancelling their society's registration, alleging the order was passed without jurisdiction as no application for cancellation of their society was filed. The respondents argued that the petition is not maintainable because a statutory appeal under Section 12-D(2) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 is available. The court examined the factual context and noted that the appropriate remedy is the statutory appeal, not a writ petition. Consequently, the court declined to entertain the writ petition, dismissing it on the ground of an alternative remedy. The court directed the petitioners to approach the appellate authority within a week and, if delayed, to seek condonation of delay under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable when a statutory appeal under Section 12-D(2) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 is available
- Whether the order cancelling the society's registration was passed within jurisdiction
Legislation cited
- Limitation Act, 1963 — s. 14
- Societies Registration Act, 1860 — s. 12-D(1), 12-D(2)
Subjects
- writ petition
- jurisdiction
- statutory appeal
- Societies Registration Act
- Limitation Act
- alternative remedy
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 18571 of 2026
Committee Of Management Shiv Parvati And
Another .....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manish Tiwari, Saurabh Tripathi, Sr.
Advocate
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 38
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Heard Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri
Ritika Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ghanshyam Dubey,
learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 3 and learned
Standing Counsel for the State.
2. A preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the respondents
that against the order cancelling the registration of the society, a statutory
appeal is provided under Section 12-D(2) of the Societies Registration
Act, 1860 and, therefore, the present petition is not maintainable.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned
order has been passed wholly without jurisdiction inasmuch as there was
no application seeking cancellation of registration of petitioner's society.
He has further submitted that an application was moved relating to
cancellation of registration of respondent no. 3. Further, neither any
grounds contemplated under Section 12-D(1) of the Act, 1860 were
attracted nor any finding, to that effect has been recorded by the authority
concerned.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the
submissions advanced across the Bar, this Court finds that adjudication of
the controversy would require appreciation of factual aspects of the
matter. Since a statutory alternative remedy of appeal is available under
WRIC No. 18571 of 2026
2
Section 12-D(2) of the Act, 1860, this Court is not inclined to entertain
the present petition.
5. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed on the ground of availability
of alternative remedy. However, it shall be open for the petitioner to
approach the appellate authority concerned for redressal of his grievance.
6. In case such an appeal is filed within a period of one week from today,
it shall be open for the petitioner to seek condonation of delay by taking
recourse to Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and the same shall be
considered in accordance with law.
(Siddharth Nandan,J.)
May 12, 2026
Sushma
Digitally signed by :-
SUSHAMA YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…