Committee of Management, Swargiya Kanchan Singh Bhooli Devi and 2 Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and 4 Others

Court No. - 32 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13093 of 2025 Petitioner :- Committee Of Management, Swargiya Kanchan Singh Bhooli Devi And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjay Srivastava Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶1Personal affidavit filed today on behalf of respondent no.2/3 is taken on record. 2 . Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Umang Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Jitendra Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for private respondent.

¶3The petitioners by means of the present writ petition have assailed the orders dated 26/27.09.2024 and 27.02.2025 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Kanpur Region, Kanpur.

¶4This Court on 30.04.2025 passed the following order:- "1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Sanjay Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent nos.4 and 5, Sri I.P. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the records.

¶2Challenging the orders dated 26/27.09.2024 and 27.02.2025 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Kanpur Region, Kanpur, counsel for the petitioners contends that this Court has directed by judgment and order dated 08.11.2024 passed in Writ-C No.36817 of 2024 to consider the objections of the petitioners. Thus, it was incumbent upon the Deputy Registrar to comply with the order of this Court dated 08.11.2024 in letter and spirit. It is submitted that the Deputy Registrar has failed to comply with the mandate of this Court passed in Writ-C No.36817 of 2024, dated

08.11.2024.

¶3Let respondent no.2, who is personally impleaded as respondent no.3 in the array of the parties, appear in person before this Court and explain as to how he could justify the impugned orders 26/27.09.2024 and 27.02.2025.

¶4Put up this case as fresh on 02.05.2025."

¶5Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 30.04.2025, Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Kanpur Region, Kanpur is present before this Court, who has been duly identified by Sri Jitendra Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

¶6In the affidavit, it is stated that earlier complaint filed by the petitioners was withdrawn, and since no application was filed, therefore, in the light of the aforesaid fact, the representation of the petitioner was decided.

¶7The petitioners in paragraph nos.13 to 17 of the writ petition have made following averments:- "13. That it subsequently, came to light that Dharamvir Singh had resorted to fabrication of papers and submitted proceedings before the Deputy Registrar claiming resignation of Dharam Pal Singh, petitioner No.2, from the office of the Manager/Secretary. Upon acquiring knowledge thereof the petitioner No.2 filed his objections dated 16.08.2022 before the Deputy Registrar.

¶14That shortly after filing of the aforesaid representation, father of the petitioner No. 2 fell seriously ill and ultimately expired.

¶15That since no action had been taken by the Deputy Registrar on the basis of objections dated 16.08.2022, the petitioner No.2 filed further representation dated 13.08.2022 before the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies & Chits, a true copy of which is annexed as Annexure No.11 to this writ petition. In support of the aforesaid representation, Dharam Pal Singh, petitioner No.2, filed his notorial affidavit dated 10.08.2024.

¶16That apart from the aforesaid two affidavits of Naresh Singh and two affidavits of Rajesh Singh Sengar were also filed before the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies & Chits on 09.08.2024.

¶17That apart from the aforesaid, affidavits of Vishal Singh, Anang Pal Singh, Kanhai Singh, Vikram Singh, Ram Singh, Ramita Singh and Jayesh Thakur were also filed before the Deputy Registrar Firms, Societies & Chits."

¶8Perusal of the averments made in the paragraph nos.13 to 17 of the writ petition, extracted above, discloses that petitioners have categorically alleged that resignation of the petitioners was forged, and several affidavits have been filed indicating that petitioners removal was illegal.

¶9The Deputy Registrar has not controverted to the averments made in paragraph nos.13 to 17 of the writ petition. The Deputy Registrar being the quasi judicial authority is expected to act judicially without being influenced by any extraneous consideration and pass the order in accordance with law.

¶10When this Court by order dated 08.11.2024 in Writ-C No.36817 of 2024 has directed the Deputy Registrar to decide the controversy after hearing all the concerned parties, it is expected of the Deputy Registrar that while deciding the controversy he will act judicially and not cursorily and causally. It is also expected of him that he shall abide by the orders passed by this Court in letter and spirit whereas finding recorded by him in the impugned order discloses that he has acted in a most causal manner in rejecting the representation of the petitioner.

¶11The aforesaid fact is established from the finding returned by the Deputy Registrar in the impugned order. Relevant extract of the impugned order is reproduced herein below:- "

यहहहपरयहउललखननयहहककततसमयसससहइटनरजजसटटनकरण(

उ०प०ससशसधन)

अजधकनयम2021

पभहवममथह।जजसकलअनतररतपबनधसकमकतकलकववहदसकलकनसतहरणकक

अपनलअजधकनयमककधहरह4-1 (क)

कलअनतररतआययककहनपयरमणडल,

कहनपयरकलसमक

यसजजतकरअनयतसषपहपककयहजहसकतहथह।

धहरह4(1-क)-

इसधहरहकलअधननककतककसनआदलशकलकवरदअपनल,

ऐसहआदलशसससकचत

ककयलजहनलकलकदनहसकसलएकमहहकलभनतरउसमणडल,

जजसककअजधकहररतहकलभनतर

सससहइटनकहमयखयहलयससथतहह,

कलआययककलसमकककजहसकतनहह।परनतययहकक

अपनलनयपहजधकहरनऐसनअवजधकलअवसहनकलपशहततअपनलसवनकहरकरसकतहहह. यकद

अपनलहथरअपनलनयपहजधकहरनकहयहसमहधहनकरदलतहहहककउसकलपहसऐसनअवजधकल

भनतरअपनलनकरनलकहपयहरपहलतयकथह।

परनतययहचनशनधमरपहलजससहदहरहऐसनकसईभनअपनलसससथतनहनककरयनहह।शन

धमरपहलजससहयहचनदहरहमह०उचचनयहयहलयकलआदलशकदनहसक08.11.2024 कलअनयपहलन

ममअपनहकसईभनकवसतकतपतयहवलदनपसतयतनहहककयहरयहहह।

सहथहनअपनलपतकदनहसक

16.12.2024

कलमहधयमसलअपननपयरहननकशकहयतकसमहतदसहरहयह

रयहहहऔरनहनइस

समबनधममकसईमसलअकभललखपसतयतककयलरयलहह।वकणरतससथकतममयहचनशनधमरपहलजससह

कसकसईभनअनयतसषसमभवनहहहह।

उपरसकतथययवउनकककववलचनहकलआधहरपरमह०उचचनयहयहलयइलहहहबहदममयसजजत

ररटयहकचकहससखयह36817/2024

ममपहररतआदलशकदनहसक08.11.2024

कलअनयपहलनमम

यहचनशनधमरपहलजससहदहरहपसतयतपतयहवलदनपरकहयहरलयपसटरलपरपसजनककतवहदससखयह कलएपन/डन10000540

ममउनहमकसईभनअनयतसषपदहननहहककयहजहसकतहहह. तदनयसहर

उनकलदहरहदहजखलवहदमह०उचचनयहयहलयइलहहहबहदकलआदलशकलकमममकनसतहररत

ककयहजहतहहह।"

¶12When once this Court has directed the Deputy Registrar to decide the claim, there was no occasion for him to record a finding that petitioners have alternative remedy of appeal.

¶13Further, when petitioners have already submitted complaint, it was the duty of the Deputy Registrar to decide the objections of the petitioners by reasoned and speaking order whereas impugned order is silent and non-speaking.

¶14Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for the private respondent also could not dispute the fact that order impugned is non-speaking.

¶15In such view of the fact, the impugned order is set aside.

¶16Before parting with the judgement, this Court may note that the conduct of the Deputy Registrar is very casual. Earlier also he passed the order illegally which this Court has stayed in Writ-C No.36817 of 2024 and remitted the matter to him to decide the claim afresh.

¶17Now again, the Deputy Registrar has cursorily passed the order without even looking to the records of the case which shows that he has least respect for the orders of this Court, and he is not discharging his duties sincerely.

¶18In view of the aforesaid fact, this Court disapproves the conduct of the Deputy Registrar and directs the Disciplinary Authority to record in his service book with regard to his inefficiency in discharging his duties.

¶19Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that the Deputy Registrar is not acting fairly and the aforesaid fact reflects that he for extraneous reason deciding the dispute casually and cursorily, and therefore, the matter may not be remitted to him and be remitted to some other Deputy Registrar of adjoining district.

¶20In such view of the fact, the matter is transferred to the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra Region, Agra, who shall decide the claim strictly in accordance with law within a period of two months after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties from the date he receives record of the case.

¶21The respondent no.2-Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Kanpur Region, Kanpur is directed to remit the record of the case to the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Agra Region, Agra within a period of three weeks from today.

¶22Since, the earlier order dated 27.09.2024 was also not sustainable in law which is evident from the finding returned by this Court in Writ-C No.36817 of 2024 and again the Deputy Registrar has acted casually in passing the fresh order, therefore, in such view of the fact, the order dated 27.09.2024 is also set aside.

¶23The writ petition is allowed subject to observations made above. There shall be no order as to costs. Order Date :- 2.5.2025 Sattyarth High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad