JUDGMENT A. N. Dikshita, J. 1. These two writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment as the disputes giving rise to same are interse between the parties to the writ petitions and also the same are interconnected. 2. Writ petition No. 6622 of 1986 has been filed by Khirodhi Singh for quashing the order dated 17-4-1986 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur respondent no. 1, marked as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. Writ petition No. 8764 of 1986 has been filed by Urwa Bazar Educational Society Urwa Bazar, Gorakhpur for quashing the order dated 16-4-1986 passed by Assistant Registrar, Firm Societies, Gorakhpur as well as the order dated 24-4-1986 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur marked as Annexures 3 and 6 respectively to the writ petition. 3. Urwa Bazar Educational Society is a charitable society registered under the Societies Registration Act since 17-3-1960. This society runs Ram Rekha Singh Intermediate College, URWA Bazar through its committe of management. The term of the managing committee of the society according to its bye-laws is 3 years. 4. Facts which encompass the controversy are in regard to the election held on 29-1-1986 by the rival petitioners. Khirodhi Singh petitioner in writ petition No. 6622 of 1986 has alleged that he was elected unopposed Secretary/Prabandhak of the Managing Committee of the Society for 3 years and which period came to an end on 22-1-1986. It is alleged by him that in the election held on 29-1-1986 he was again elected as Seceretary/Manager of the Society for 3 years and one Shiv Ratan Bharti was elected as President of Society. 5. In Writ petition No. 8764 of 1986 one Nar Singh Prasad Singh alleges that in the election meeting held on 29-1-1986 he was elected as the Secretary-cum-Manager of the Managing Committee and one Sukh Mangal Mani Tripathi was elected as the President. 6. Pursuant to his alleged re-election Khirodhi Singh applied for renewal of the registration of the Society before the Assistant Registrar (Firms and Societies). The Assistant Registrar vide his order dated 16-4-1986 renewed the registration of the society with Khirodhi Singh as its Secretary/Manager of the Managing Committee. 6. Pursuant to his alleged re-election Khirodhi Singh applied for renewal of the registration of the Society before the Assistant Registrar (Firms and Societies). The Assistant Registrar vide his order dated 16-4-1986 renewed the registration of the society with Khirodhi Singh as its Secretary/Manager of the Managing Committee. Feeling aggrieved Nar Singh Prasad Singh and Sukh Mangal Mani Tripathi filed Suit No. 180 of 1986 in the Civil Court against the Managing Committee with Shiv Jatan Bharati as President and Khirodhi Singh as Secretary/ Manager for a declaration that the election of the office-bearers of the Managing Committee which elected Khirodhi Singh as Secretary/Manager and Shiv Jatan Bharti as President as well as the order of the Assistant Registrar dated 16-4-1986 be declared as null and void. An application in the suit was filed for a temporary injunction restraining the Managing Committee managed by Khirodhi Singh from functioning. However, no exparte temporary injunction was granted and the case was ordered to be listed on 30-5-1986 for orders. 7. Urwa Bazar Educational Society, Gorakhpur through Nar Singh Prasad Singh then filed writ petition No. 8764 of 1984 in the court and the operation of the order dated 16-4-1986 passed by the Assistant Registrar was stayed by this court on 23-5-1986. 8. The plaintiff Nar Singh Prasad Singh then filed an application on 26-5-1986 for permission to withdraw the suit which was allowed on the same day. It may, however, be mentioned that in view of the contesting claims of the rival committees, the D. I. O. S. vide his order dated 29-3-1986 directed for single operation of the account. However, lateron vide order dated 17-4-1986 the D. I. O. S. Gorakhpur recognised the Managing Committee with Nar Singh Prasad Singh and attested his signatures for the operation of the account. 9. This order dated 17-4-1986 is being challenged by Khirodhi Singh in writ petition No. 6622 of 1986. 10. Lateron the D. I. O. S. in view of the order dated 16-4-1986 passed by Assistant Registrar, Gorakhpur stayed the operation of the order dated 17-4-1986 by his order dated 24-4-1986. This order dated 24-4-1986 as well as the order dated 16-4-1986 have been challenged by Urwa Bazar Educational Society, Gorakhpur in writ petition No. 8764 of 1986. 11. 10. Lateron the D. I. O. S. in view of the order dated 16-4-1986 passed by Assistant Registrar, Gorakhpur stayed the operation of the order dated 17-4-1986 by his order dated 24-4-1986. This order dated 24-4-1986 as well as the order dated 16-4-1986 have been challenged by Urwa Bazar Educational Society, Gorakhpur in writ petition No. 8764 of 1986. 11. Sri Jagdish Swaroop, learned counsel for the petitioner Khirodi Singh has submitted that the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur has acted without jurisdiction and manifestly erred in law in passing the impugned order dated 17-4-1986. There is no dispute that pursuant to the election held on 29-1-1986 rival parties had set forth their claims alleging themselves to be duly elected. The lis between the parties was pending, the interest of the employees and teachers in view of the fact that their salary for the month of February 1986 could not be paid the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur exercising powers under section 5 (1) of the Payment of Salaries Act 1971 directed single operation. This power was exercised by the District Inspector of Schools within the tenets of the Statute. However, the District Inspector of Schools lateron scanning the facts of records recognised the Managing Committee of Nar Singh Prasad Singh and attested his signature for necessary action, i. e. for the payment of salary to the employees and teachers of the college. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioner Khirodhi Singh has attacked this order on two grounds. Firstly, the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur is not vested with the powers to recognise the Committee of Management of which Nar Singh Prasad Singh was the Manager. Such an assumption of jurisdiction is wholly illegal and manifestly bad in law. The other submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner Khirodhi Singh is that the impugned order dated 17-4-1986 has been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice as it was passed at the back of the petitioner Khirodhi Singh without affording him any opportunity. We find merit in both these submissions. 13. It is clear that the rival claims of the parties were pending before the Assistant Registrar for the renewal of the registration of the society. The lis in regard to the election held on 29-1-1986 was not yet resolved. We find merit in both these submissions. 13. It is clear that the rival claims of the parties were pending before the Assistant Registrar for the renewal of the registration of the society. The lis in regard to the election held on 29-1-1986 was not yet resolved. Undisputedly the District Inspector of Schools was not vested with the powers either under the U. P. Intermediate Education Act or the regulations framed thereunder to pass an order recognising a committee till the dispute was legally settled. The District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur having this fact in mind and in view of ameliorating the plight of the employees and teachers passed an order on 29-3-1986 purporting to be under section 5 (1) of the Payment of Salaries Act, 1971. This was rightly done. But there arose no occasion for the District Inspector of Schools to pass a fresh order on 17-4-1986 recognising the committe with Nar Singh Prasad Singh as Manager. This is significantly an abuse of the powers by the District Inspector of Schools. 14. This impugned order dated 17-4-86 is also bad in law as well as without jurisdiction as the District Inspector of Schools had passed this order without affording any opportunity to the rival claimant Khirodhi Singh. There was absolutely no justification to modify or review the order dated 29-3-86 nor the circumstances permitted the District Inspector of Schools to pass the impugned order afresh till the decision of the dispute. The District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur as an administrative authority could only exercise such powers and functions as are conferred upon him by law. Moreover the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur has passed the impugned order without affording any opportunity to the petitioner Khirodhi Singh. Significantly it was passed at his back. Petitioner Khirodhi Singh is categorically asserting that no opportunity whatsoever was ever afforded to him while passing the impugned order dated 17-4-86. No counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 1 the District Inspector of Schools. The allegations thus go uncontroverted. 15. The Supreme Court in a catena of decisions has upheld the principles of natural justice having come to be recognised as being part of guarantee contained in Article 14 of the Constitution of India because of the new and dynamic interpretation given to the concept of equality as enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution. 15. The Supreme Court in a catena of decisions has upheld the principles of natural justice having come to be recognised as being part of guarantee contained in Article 14 of the Constitution of India because of the new and dynamic interpretation given to the concept of equality as enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution. Violation of this rule of natural justice results in arbitrariness. There can be no distinction between a quasi-judicial function and an administrative function for testing the applicability of the doctrine of natural justice. Reasonable opportunity is engrained in the doctrine of natural justice and the incumbent has to be afforded an opportunity. If such an opportunity is not being afforded, there is gross violation of the principles of natural justice rendering the impugned order void abinitio. 16. Another salient feature which requires consideration is that the District Inspector of Schools had no jurisdiction to encroach upon the power of Dy. Regional Director of Education as provided under section 16-A (7) of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921. From the above it is clear that the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur while passing the impugned order dated 17-4-1986 acted without jurisdiction and manifestly erred in law and the order dated 17-4-86 deserves to be quashed. 17. In the other Writ petition no. 8764 of 1986 filed by Urwa Bazar Educational Society, Gorakhpur the order dated 16-4-86 passed by the Assistant Registrar has been challenged by which the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits U. P. Gorakhpur (hereinafter referred to as the Assistant Registrar) renewed the registration of the Society with Khirodhi Singh as the Secretary/ Manager and it has been urged on behalf of Urwa Bazar Society by its learned counsel Sri G. N. Verma that the Assistant Registrar has exceeded his jurisdiction in passing the impugned order dated 16-4-86. 18. We agree with the submission. Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act reads as under : "25. Disputes regarding election of office-bearers.-(1) The prescribed authority may, on a reference made to it by the Registrar or by atleast one- fourth of the members of a society registered in Uttar Pradesh, hear and decide in a summary manner any doubt or dispute in respect of the election or continuance in office of an office-bearer of such society, and may pass such orders in respect thereof as it deems fit : 19. The above provisions clearly reveal that the Prescribed Authority has jurisdiction to decide in a summary manner any doubt or dispute-(i) in respect of the election and (ii) or continuance in office bearer. Khirodhi Singh as well as Narsingh Prasad Singh were fiercely staking their claims having been duly elected as Manager of the Committee before the Assistant Registrar. It involved a determination of the question as to which of the committee of which the persons named above had been duly elected. The Assistant Registrar proceeded to decide this dispute and renewed the registration of the Society of which Khirodhi Singh was the Manager. This implicitly recognises that Khirodhi Singh was elected Manager on 29-1-86. This was not within the domain or competence of the Assistant Registrar. The Assistant Registrar before whom the rival claims were staked instead of referring the dispute to the Prescribed Authority ventured to decide it himself. It was incumbent on the Assistant Registrar to have the matter referred to the Prescribed Authority instead of assuming jurisdiction which otherwise did not vest in him. The order dated 16-4-86 is thus rendered illegal and bad for want of jurisdiction. It also deserves to be quashed. 20. As the order dated 17-4-86 is being quashed the order dated 24-4-86 would automatically become non-est. In view of the foregoing discussions Writ Petition No. 6622 of 1986 is allowed and the impugned order dated 17-4-86 is hereby quashed. Similarly, writ petition No. 8764 of 1986 is partly allowed and the impugned order dated 16-4-86 is also quashed. 21. In the circumstances of the case we issue a writ of mandamus commanding the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, U. P. Gorakhpur to refer the dispute to the Prescribed Authority within two weeks from the presentation of a copy of this order by petitioner Urwa Bazar. 22. We further issue a writ of mandamus commanding the District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur to operate the account singly till the dispute in regard to the election of the office-bearers on 29-1-1986 is decided by the Prescribed Authority. In the circumstances of the case the parties shall bear their own costs. Petition allowed.