HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 23 (M/S) of 2006 Arun Kumar Rai S/o Bhagwan Rai, R/o Office of the Assistant Director, Watershed Management Unit, Roorkee at Landhora, District- Haridwar. ….Petitioner Vs 1. District Jude, Dehradun. 2. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Dehradun. 3. Sri Ramesh Chand Chauhan R/o 101 Rajpur Road, Dehradun. 4. Sri Anil Kumar Yadav, Sahayak Nideshak Jalagam, Prabandhak, Election Officer for biennial election Of the Uttaranchal Bhumi Evam Jal Sanrakshan Vikas Pravidhik Association , Dehradun. 5. Sri Inderpal Singh Malik, Sahayak Jalagam Prabandhak, Roorkee at Landhora, District- Haridwar. 6. Sri Suresh Pal Singh, Sahayak Jalagam Prabandhak, Gopeshwar, District- Chamoli. 7. Sri Puran Singh Bisht, Sahayak Jalagam Prabandhak, Nainital. 8. Sri Ramchandra Savita, Sahayak Jalagam, Prabandhak, Nainital. ……Respondents Sri Navneet Kaushik learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri B.D.Upadhayay learned counsel for the respondents. Sri Nand Prasad learned Standing counsel for the State- Respondent No.1 and 2. Dated: - 10-3-2006 Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. Heard Sri Navneet Kaushik learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri B.D. Upadhaya learned counsel for he respondent and Sri Nand Prasad learned Standing counsel for the state-respondent No.1 and 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 20-10-2005 passed by respondent No.1 by which Misc. Civil Appeal No. 162 of 2005 Arun Kumar Rai Vs. Ramesh Chandra Chauhan and others have been dismissed and the order dates 30-8-2005 passed by Respondent No.2 by which application 6C has been allowed whereby the 2 operation of the letter dated 5-7-2005 was stayed during the pendency of the suit. Brief facts of the case are that the Uttaranchal Bhumi Evam Jal Sanrakshan Jalagam Vikas Paravidhik Association is a registered Society duly registered under the Societies registration Act related to the Uttaranchal Rajya Karamchari Sanyukt Parishad was held on 5-7-2005. It is also admitted to both the parties that Sri Ramesh Chandra Chauhan was president till the Election to be held and defendant No.1 was appointed as Election Officer to conduct the Election of the said Association as per rules and Bylaws of the Societies. The Respondent No.1 had file an Original Suit No. 266/05 Uttaranchal Bhumi Evam Jal Sanrakshan Jalagam Vikas Pravidhik Association Vs. Anil Kumar Yadav and others for declaration that the letter dated 5-7-2005 is illegal malafide and void is not binding on the petitioner. The petitioner has further prayed for decree for permanent injunction for restraining defendants No.2 to 6 from acting in pursuance of the letter dated 5-7-2005 issued by defendant No.1. The application 6-C2 for Ad interim injunction was moved by Sri Ramesh Chandra Chauhan president of said Association with a prayer that till the disposal of the suit, the effect of the letter dated 5-7-2005 shall be kept in abeyance on the ground that the so called Election of the Association was not conducted according to the By-laws of the societies and in the Election the persons who were not a member has been included in the Election process. Further, the respondents/ defendant No.2 was not entitled to take part in the Election proceeding. The objection 13-C has been filed by the defendant No.2 against the application filed on behalf of the plaintiff. After hearing both the parties, the learned Civil Judge (J.D), Dehradun allowed the application 6-C2 stayed the operation of the letter-dated 5.7.2005 till the decision of the suit. The main objection of the petitioner is that office bearer of Society only can challenged the Election by way of Election Petition U/s 25 of Societies Registration Act. Hence the suit is not maintainable and the civil court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. The application was allowed by respondent No.2. Aggrieved by the order of Civil Judge (J.D) Dehradun. The petitioner filed a Misc. Civil appeal No. 162/05 before the District Judge. Similary, an appeal was also filed by 3 respondent No.4 Sri Anil Kumar Yadav which was numbered as Civil Misc. Appeal No. 164/05. The following main grounds have been raised before the District Judge:- 1- No suit could have been instituted by respondent No.3 in the capacity as president of Uttaranchal Bhumi Evam Jal Sanrakshan Jalagam Vikas Pravidhik Association. 2- Regarding Jurisdiction of respondent No.2 suit is not maintainable and expressly barred by jurisdiction 3- No interim injunction can be granted to effect that the internal management of affairs and educational institution including a University or Society. 4- And further more the Law Secretary of Society can filed the Suit on behalf of the society. The respondent No.1 has also dismissed the Misc. Civil Appeal filed by the petitioner on 20-10-2005 and it was held by the appellate court that under Section 25 of the Registration of Societies Act does not bar jurisdiction of the Civil court. In the present writ petition the main thrust of argument was that the provisions of Section 25 of the Societies of Registration Act have been wrongly interpretated by the court below. The main controversy raised by the petitioner is that the civil court has no jurisdiction to entertaining the suit. The only remedy is available to the plaintiff under Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act. Reliance was placed before the District Judge on behalf of the contesting respondents on the Judgment referred by the respondents 1978 All. L.J. page 672 Prabhat Mishra Vs. Jai Shankar Tripathi and it was submitted that Section 25 of the Act does not bar the jurisdiction of the Civil court. The same view was up held by the Hon’ble Apex court in 1990 A.L.R. page 920 Nagri Pracharini Sabha and another Vs. Vth Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Varanasi and others. In both the cases the disputes relate challenge of Election of the office bearers. The maintainability of the dispute within the purview of that Section is hedged with conditions and unless such requirement is fulfilled a statutory dispute could not be maintainable. It was further held that it cannot be contended that Section 25 having provided the preconditions on the 4 satisfaction of which a dispute within the purview of that Section would be maintainable before the Registrar takes away the right of members of the Society to claim relief otherwise outside the purview of Section 25 on the basis of their right to seek remedy for their grievance. I fully agree with the finding of the District Judge. The 2nd point has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that learned Civil Judge (J.D.) has no jurisdiction to issue ad interim injunction in the matter of internal matter of the Societies. This provision was added by the Act 57 of 1976 and later on by the amendment Act “to affect the internal management or affairs of any educational institution including a University, or a society or” omitted by U.P. Act 17 of 1991. I do not find that the learned Civil Judge (J.D.) and District Judge have committed any manifest error of law. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. However, the Civil Judge (J.D.) is directed to decide the case preferably within a period of three months as far as possible from the production of the certified copy of the order. (B.S. Verma, J) Dated:- 10-3-2006 M.K.