MOHD TABIB KHAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This special appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 18566 of 2006 dated 4.4.2006.

(2.) FACTS giving rise to the present appeal are Madarsa Jamya Ahley Sunnat Emdadul Ulum, Matehna, Post Khadsari Bazar district Siddhartha Nagar is a society duly registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter called the 'Act 1860"). Elections of the office bearers of the society are stated to have taken place in the year 2000. Proceedings under Section 25 (1) of the Act, 1860 were initiated by respondents 4 to 58 questioning the elections so held before the prescribed authority. The dispute was registered as Misc. Case No. 17 of 2001. During the pendency of the dispute, the term of the office bearers expired on 9.10.2005. Prior to the expiry of the term of the office bearers of the society, fresh elections are said to have taken place on 25.9.2005. On the strength of the elections so held the appellant-petitioner submitted an application dated 6.10.2005 before the Assistant Registrar Firms Societies and Chits Gorakhpur Region Gorakhpur seeking renewal of the registration of the society. In the meantime the prescribed authority by means of his order dated 17.3.2006 answered the reference under Section 25 (1) of the Act, 1860 and directed that a copy of the order alongwith the relevant file be transmitted to the Assistant Registrar Firms Societies and Chits Gorakhpur for appropriate action. Against this order of the prescribed authority the appellant who claims to be the Manager of the Committee of Management of the Madarsa filed Writ Petition No. 18566 of 2006. The learned single Judge by means of his judgment and order dated 4.4.2006 dismissed the writ petition after recording that it raises disputed questions of fact and it is not feasible under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to decide such disputed issues of fact. Accordingly the writ petition has been dismissed with the liberty to the petitioner-appellant to approach the civil court. It is against this order that the present special appeal has been filed.

(3.) IN support of his aforesaid contentions, Shri Khare has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Apex Court in Bharat Bank Ltd., Delhi v. Employees of the Bharat Bank Ltd., Delhi, AIR 1950 SC 188 ; Mrs. Sarojini Ramaswami v. Union of INdia and others, AIR 1992 SC 2219 ; Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd., Meerut v. Lakshmi Chand and others, AIR 1963 SC 677.