Manufacturing Unit Must Be in Uttar Pradesh to Bid for Child Nutrition Tender — Delhi High Court Upholds NAFED's Geographical Eligibility Condition for Rs. 2,768 Crore ICDS Supply Contract 800-Strong Mob Unleashed Against ED Officials During PDS Scam Search — Calcutta High Court Refuses Bail, Cites Witness Intimidation Threat Section 29A Cannot Reach Into a Special Statutory Code: Bombay High Court Rules Time Limit Provisions of Arbitration Act Inapplicable to Highway Land Acquisition Arbitrations Mala Fides Are ‘Easily Alleged but Hardly Proved’: Andhra Pradesh High Court Refuses to Quash Income Tax Summons” Child Witness Testimony Can Sustain Conviction Without Corroboration If Reliable: Allahabad High Court FD Deposited With Bank Does Not Make Corporate a 'Commercial Purpose' User — But Fraud Allegations Can't Be Tried in Consumer Forum: Supreme Court Movie Flopped, But That's Not Cheating — Supreme Court Quashes Section 420 IPC Against Film Producer Who Borrowed Investment Money on Profit-Sharing Promise No Rape Where Consent Is Conscious and Marriage Impossible: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Man Accused of False Promise Charge Sheet Served On Last Day of Service, Punishment After Retirement: Supreme Court Upholds Pay Reduction of Bank Officer Post-Superannuation IAS Officer Convicted for Contempt Gets Fine Waived on Apology, But Gets Stricture: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashing Cannot Become a Mini-Trial: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Halt Rape Case Linked to ‘Exorcism’ and Blackmail NDPS | Prosecution Cannot Pin Cannabis Cultivation on One Co-Owner Without Proof: Bombay HC Acquits Seventeen Years of Waiting is Itself Punishment: Calcutta High Court Balances Conviction with Constitutional Compassion Bigger Truck, Damaged Motorcycle — But Insurance Company Cannot Apportion Negligence Without Examining the Driver: Gujarat High Court Tenant Cannot Bequeath Tenancy Rights by Will Under HP Tenancy Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court A Registered Sale Deed And Mutation Cannot Override Fundamental Principle That Vendor Cannot Convey Better Title Than He Possesses: Punjab & Haryana High Court Non-Recovery of the Dead Body Is Not an Absolute Requirement for Conviction: Delhi High Court Upholds Murder Conviction Supplemental Agreement Signed Under Threat Of Contract Termination Cannot Negate Contractor's Claim For Extra Expenditure: Kerala High Court No Bail Without Hearing the Victim: Kerala High Court Declares Orders Passed in Violation of SC/ST Act ‘Non-Est’ False Promise, Pregnancy, and Denial of Paternity: Telangana High Court Grants Bail Amid Pending DNA Evidence

Mechanical Referrals Invalid: "Deputy Registrar Must Apply Judicial Mind: Allahabad HC Quashes Deputy Registrar's Order in Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Election Dispute

23 September 2024 7:40 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), in the case of Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Lucknow Thru. Pradhan Devendra Pal Verma & Anr. vs. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Institutional Finance, Lko. & Ors., quashed the Deputy Registrar's April 23, 2022, order referring multiple election disputes of the Arya Pratinidhi Sabha to the Prescribed Authority. The court held that the Deputy Registrar failed to apply judicial mind and issue a reasoned decision before referring the matter, violating legal standards for referral under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860.

The dispute arose from competing claims by four factions within the Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, each asserting the validity of separate elections held in 2021. The Deputy Registrar had referred the election disputes to the Prescribed Authority without offering substantive reasons or verifying the legitimacy of the competing claims. The factions involved included groups led by Devendra Pal Verma, Bhuwan Tiwari, Vivek Singh, and Ram Ratan Chaturvedi, all claiming to have conducted valid elections for the management of the Sabha.

The primary legal issue was whether the Deputy Registrar lawfully referred the disputes to the Prescribed Authority without first applying judicial scrutiny to the competing election claims. The court noted that under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, the Deputy Registrar is not merely a "rubber stamp" but is required to ascertain whether there is a bona fide dispute before referring the matter. The court emphasized:

"The Deputy Registrar must apply his mind and form a subjective satisfaction as to whether there is a genuine and bona fide election dispute, and not act mechanically."

The court quashed the Deputy Registrar's order, stating that his failure to provide a reasoned decision amounted to a violation of procedural fairness. Justice Jaspreet Singh remarked that without examining the legitimacy of the rival factions' claims, the referral to the Prescribed Authority was premature and lacked legal justification.

The court also highlighted contradictions in the election claims, noting that some individuals appeared in multiple factions’ election lists, raising doubts about the integrity of these elections.

The Allahabad High Court ordered the matter to be remitted to the Deputy Registrar for fresh consideration, with instructions to issue a reasoned and speaking order. The court stressed the need for prompt resolution and directed the Deputy Registrar to complete the reconsideration within four months.

Date of Decision: September 18, 2024

Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Lucknow Thru. Pradhan Devendra Pal Verma & Anr. vs. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Institutional Finance, Lko. & Ors.

Latest Legal News