S. L. JAIN, J. ( 1 ) : Being aggrieved by the order dated 6-5-2002, passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 684/2002, appellants have filed this appeal under clause 10 of Letters Patent. ( 2 ) FACTS shorn of details and necessary for disposal of this appeal are that shramdham Uchchhatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya sanchalan Samiti, Kaymore (hereinafter referred to as "society No. 1"), Prabandh samiti, Shramadham Madhyamik Vidyalaya, amheta (hereinafter referred to as "society no. 2"); and Bapu Bal Mandir Prabandh samiti, Kaymore (hereinafter referred to as "society No. 3") filed a writ petition before this Court alleging that they are societies independently registered under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Societies Registration Adhiniyam, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "1973 Adhiniyam" ). Society No. 1 runs Shramdham Uchchatar Madhyamik vidyalaya, Kaymore, Society No. 2 runs shramdham Middle School and Shramdham high School, Amheta; and Society No. 3 runs bapu Bal Mandir, Kaymore. Except Shramdham high School, Amheta remaining three schools received 100 percent grant in aid from the State Government. All the three societies have their separate Constitution. All the three societies are functioning independently, managing their respective schools in accordance with the directions issued by the State Government from time to time and managing the affairs of societies in accordance with their respective Constitution. ( 3 ) IT is also the case of the appellants that there is a society known as "shramdham Sewa sansthan", at Kaymore (hereinafter referred to as "society No. 4" ). The respondent No. 4 Ram Avtar Tiwari projected himself as President of this Society against duly elected President of the Society, namely govind Prasad Pandey. The Registrar, Firms and Societies did not accept the election of ram Avtar Tiwari but also did not record the election of Govind Prasad Pandey. The said Shri Pandey preferred an appeal before the Registrar, Firms and Societies who allowed the same but the State Government, on an appeal preferred by Ram Avtar Tiwari without recording any positive finding in his favour as regards his status as President of the Society remanded the matter before the assistant Registrar, to hold an enquiry under section 32 of the 1973 Adhiniyam. This order of State Government was challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No. 4076/ 2001. This order of State Government was challenged before this Court in Writ Petition No. 4076/ 2001. According to the appellants, the dispute between Ram Avtar Tiwari and Govind prasad Pandey is in relation to Society No. 4, which is a separate legal entity. ( 4 ) ON 24-1-2002, District Education Officer, respondent No. 3 directed that the society Nos. 1, 2 and 3 shall be managed by the committee constituted by Ram Avtar tiwari said to be the President of Society no. 4. This order of respondent No. 4 was challenged before this Court in Writ Petition no. 684/2002 on the ground that the Society Nos. 1, 2 and 3, each being a separate entity, cannot be directed to be controlled and managed by committee constituted by president of Society No. 1. It was alleged that the said direction has been issued with mala fide intention so as to accord undue favour to respondent No. 4 who has no authority over the petitioners-societies. ( 5 ) THE petition was combated by the respondents. In the return filed by respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 the stand has been taken that the election and constitution of Society no. 4 was challenged before the competent authority under the 1973 Adhiniyam. In appeal as per order dated 8-8-2001 the State government allowed the Managing Committee constituted by respondent No. 4, to run society No. 4 till the decision of election dispute under Section 32 of 1973 Adhiniyam. It was further contended that two parallel governing bodies exist in relation to Society no. 4. The District Education Officer has exercised the power under Section 31-A of 1973 Adhiniyam. The order is interim in nature and no interference is called for. It was also contended by respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 that the impugned order of District education Officer, Katni is appealable under Section 40 of 1973 Adhiniyam as he has exercised the power of Registrar under Section 31 -A of the said Adhiniyam and since the alternative remedy is available, therefore, the writ petition was not maintainable. ( 6 ) RESPONDENT No. 4 herein, in his return contended that though Society Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are registered independently, but they have been created by Shramdham Sewa sansthan i. e. Society No. 4 and Society No. 1 has deep and all pervasive control over society Nos. 1, 2 and 3. ( 6 ) RESPONDENT No. 4 herein, in his return contended that though Society Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are registered independently, but they have been created by Shramdham Sewa sansthan i. e. Society No. 4 and Society No. 1 has deep and all pervasive control over society Nos. 1, 2 and 3. The patron members of society No. 4 have to be the Patrons of Society Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and out of such patron members one has to be the President. There is dispute that who are to be patron members of all the petitioner-societies as theparallel bodies of Society No. 4 have been constituted and respondent No. 4 as Chairman of one of these bodies, having been recognized to continue as such till decision is taken after enquiry as per order annexure P-10, Writ Petition No. 4076/2000 was filed against this order which was dismissed. ( 7 ) IN the impugned order the learned single Judge found that there is co-relationship between Society No. 4 and Society Nos. 1, 2 and 3. As two parallel bodies were constituted and dispute is pending to determine the fact that out of these two parallel bodies, which one is legally constituted body of society No. 4, an enquiry in this regard was directed by the State. The enquiry is pending before the Registrar. The learned single judge concluded that the District Education Officer exercised the power under Section 31 -A of the 1973 Adhiniyam and against this order an appeal lies under Section 40 thereof. As the appeal is provided, the learned single Judge refused to interfere in the matter and directed that if the appeal is filed, the same may be considered and decided within a month. The learned single judge also directed the Registrar of the Societies to complete the enquiry within the stipulated time as directed in Writ Petition no. 4076/2002. ( 8 ) WE have heard Shri Rohit Arya, learned counsel appearing for appellants, shri P. D. Gupta, learned Deputy Advocate general, for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3; and Shri L. S. Baghel, learned senior counsel with shri G. S. Baghel, Advocate, for respondent No. 4 at length; and perused the record. 4076/2002. ( 8 ) WE have heard Shri Rohit Arya, learned counsel appearing for appellants, shri P. D. Gupta, learned Deputy Advocate general, for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3; and Shri L. S. Baghel, learned senior counsel with shri G. S. Baghel, Advocate, for respondent No. 4 at length; and perused the record. ( 9 ) THE contention of Shri Rohit Arya is catalogued below: (1) that Section 31a of Act of 1973 provides that the Registrar for the purpose of chapter VII of the Act shall mean the Education Officer within the meaning of Clause (c) of Section 2 of Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya shikshan Sansthan (Adhyapakon Tatha anya Karmacharion Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya)adhiniyam, 1978 (hereinafter referred as "1978 Adhiniyam"), but the said Section neither authorises nor confers any power upon the Education Officer to supersede the existing registered managing body/committee of the societies or interfere with their working. The impugned order dated 24-1-2002 passed by the Registrar is in fact an order of supersession of the appellant societies. Since the order of respondent No. 3 dated 24-1 -2002 has not been passed under section 31a of the Act of 1973, the learned single judge erred in holding that such order was appealable under Section 40 of 1973 adhiniyam. (2) The order passed by the respondent no. 3 is without any authority and jurisdiction. The Principal Government Higher Secondary school, Vijayraogarh has been appointed as Education officer under Section 2 (c) of the 1978 Adhiniyam, for Shramdham higher Secondary School, Kymore, run by appellant No. 1 society and incharge Principal higher Secondary School, Deorakala, has been appointed as Education Officer for two schools run by appellant Nos. 2 and 3, hence these authorities shall be the Education officer, therefore, respondent No. 3 had no authority to act as Registrar. Under Section 32 of the Act of 1973 the Registrar of firms and Societies can only hold an enquiry into the constitution, working and the financial conditions of the society, and, only the State Government is competent to supersede a society under Section 33 of the act, therefore, the respondent No. 3 could not have superseded the appellant society and substituted the same by Sanchalan samiti to be nominated by Shri Ramavtar tiwari, respondent No. 4. ( 10 ) PER contra, Shri P. D. Gupta, learned deputy Advocate General for respondent nos. 1 and 3 and Shri L. S. Baghel. ( 10 ) PER contra, Shri P. D. Gupta, learned deputy Advocate General for respondent nos. 1 and 3 and Shri L. S. Baghel. learned senior counsel for respondent No. 4 supported the impugned order and submitted that as per constitution of society No. 4 it has a deep pervasive control over the appellant Nos. 2 and 3 and the patron members of the society No. 4 have to be the patrons of appellants society Nos. 1 to 3 and out of such patron members one has to be the president. ( 11 ) TO appreciate the contention of Shri rohit Arya, it will be apposite to refer to chapter VII of 1973 Adhiniyam, which consists of Sections 31 A, 32 and 33 only. These sections are quoted below for ready reference: "31 A. In this Chapter "registrar" shall mean Education Officer within the meaning of clause (c) of Section 2 of the Madhya pradesh Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karmachariyon Ke vetano Ka Sandaya) Adhiniyam 1978. " "32. Enquiry and settlement of disputes. (1) The Registrar may, on his own motion or on an application made under sub-section (2) either by himself or by a person authorised by his, by order in writing, hold an enquiry into the constitution, working and financial conditions of a society. (2) An enquiry of the nature referred to in sub-section (1) shall be held on the application together with an affidavit in support of its contents. (a) a majority of the members of the governing body of the society; or (b) not less than one-third of the total number of members of the society. (2) An enquiry of the nature referred to in sub-section (1) shall be held on the application together with an affidavit in support of its contents. (a) a majority of the members of the governing body of the society; or (b) not less than one-third of the total number of members of the society. (3) The Registrar or the person authorised by him under sub-section (1) shall for the purpose of an enquiry under this Section have the following powers, namely: (a) he shall at all times have free access to the books, accounts, documents, securities, cash and other properties belonging to, or in the custody of, the society and may summon any person in possession, or responsible for the custody of any such books, accounts, documents, securities, cash or other properties to produce the same, if they relate to the head office of the society at any place at the headquarter thereof and if they relate to any branch of the society, at any place in the town wherein such branch thereof is located or in his own office; (b) he may summon any person who he has reason to believe has knowledge of any of the affairs of the society to appear before him at any place at the headquarters of the society or any branch thereof or in his own office and may examine such person on oath; and (c) (i) he may notwithstanding any regulation or bye-law specifying the period of notice for a general meeting of the society, require the officers of the society, call a general meeting of the society at such time at one head office of the society or at any other place at the headquarter of the society and to determine such matters as may be directed by him and where the officers of the society refuse or fail to call such a meeting, he shall have power to call it himself; (ii) any meeting called under sub-clause (i) shall have all the powers of the general meeting called under the regulations or byelaws of the society and its proceedings shall be regulated by such bye-laws. (4) when an enquiry is made under this section the Registrar shall communicate the result of the enquiry to the society and may issue appropriate directions to the society, which shall be binding on all parties concerned. 33. Supersession of governing body. (4) when an enquiry is made under this section the Registrar shall communicate the result of the enquiry to the society and may issue appropriate directions to the society, which shall be binding on all parties concerned. 33. Supersession of governing body. (1) if, in the opinion of the State Government, governing body of any state aided society (a) persistently makes default or is negligent in the performance of the duties imposed on it by or under this Act, regulations or bye-laws of the society or by any lawful order passed by the State Government or registrar, or is unwilling to perform such duties; or [ (a) persistently makes default or is negligent in the performance of the duties imposed on it by or under this Act, regulations or bye-laws of the society or by or under any other enactment for the time being in force or by any lawful order passed by the State government or Registrar or is unwilling to perform such duties; or] (b) commits acts which are prejudicial to the interest of the society or its members; or (c) is otherwise not functioning properly, the State Government may, by order, in writing, remove the governing body and appoint a person or persons to manage the affairs of the society for a specified period not exceeding two years in the first instance. Provided that where it is proposed to remove the governing body of the society exclusively on the ground that election to the governing body were not held in accordance with the provisions of this Act or the regulations or bye-laws made thereunder, no action shall be taken under this sub-section unless the Registrar or an officer authorised by him in this behalf had convened a meeting of the general body for conducting the election thereto in accordance with the provisions of this Act, or the Regulations or bye-laws made thereunder but has failed to get the new governing body elected; provided further that the Registrar or the officer authorised by him shall, for the purpose of conducting election have all the necessary powers under the Act or the regulations or by bye-laws made thereunder. (2) No order under sub-section (1) shall be made unless the governing body has been given a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the proposed order and representation, if any, made by it, is considered. (2) No order under sub-section (1) shall be made unless the governing body has been given a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the proposed order and representation, if any, made by it, is considered. (3) The period specified in the order under sub-section (1) may, at the discretion of the State Government be extended from time to time; provided that no such order shall remain in force for more than three years in the aggregate. (4) The person or persons so appointed shall, subject to the control of the Registrar and to such instructions as he may from time to time give, have power to exercise all or any of the functions of the governing body or of any officer of the society, and to take all such actions as may be required in the interest of the society. (5) The State Government may fix the remuneration payable to the person or persons so appointed. The amount of such remuneration and other costs, if any, incurred in the management of the society shall be payable from its funds. (6) The person or persons so appointed shall at the expiry of the period of his or their appointment, arrange for the constitution of a new governing body in accordance with the regulations of the society. (7) If there is a difference of opinion between the general body of the society and person or persons appointed under sub-section (1) in respect of any matter it shall be referred to the Registrar for decision and his decision thereon shall be final. (8) During the period between the issuance of notice and the passing of an order removing the governing body, the governing body may be required by the State Government to function under the supervision and with the approval of such authority as the State Government may specify in this behalf and on order made or resolution passed or any other act performed by the governing body, shall be effectual unless it is appointed by such specified authority. " it will also be apposite to refer Section 2 (c) of 1978 Adhiniyam, which has been referred in section 31a of the Act of 1973, which reads as under : 2{c) "education Officer" means the District Education officer or any other Officer of the State Government or any other teacher serving in the institution not below the rank of Principal or Headmaster by whatever name called, appointed by the State Government as such for the purposes of this act. " here, we may also refer a Notification No. F. 852-XX-9-78, as follows: "notification No. F-852-XX-9-78, dated the 31st August, 1978. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of Section 2 of the Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya Shikshan sanstha (Adhyapakaon Tatha Anya karamcharion Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya)adhiniyam, 1978 (No. 20 of 1978), the State government hereby appoints. (i) all Principals of Government Colleges in the State. (ii) all Divisional Superintendents of Education in the State. (iii) all Dy. Superintendents of Education in the State. (iv) all Assistant Divisional Superintendents of education in the State. (v) all Principals of Government Higher secondary School in the State. (vi) all Principals of Basic Training Institutions in the state, as Education Officers for the purposes of the said Act. The Notification was published in Madhya pradesh Rajpatra (Asadharan), dated 1-9-78, page 1552. " it is true that for the purpose of Sections 31 A, 32 and 33 (supra), Registrar shall mean education Officer, but perusal of Annexure a-8 and A-9 reveals that the Principal, Government higher Secondary School Vijayrao-garh, Katni has been nominated as Education Officer for Shramdham Higher Secondary school, Katni being run by appellant No. 1society and for remaining two schools being run by appellant Nos. 2 and 3, in charge principal Government Higher Secondary school Devrikala, District Katni has been nominated as the Education Officer. Thus, these Principals are the Education Officer within the meaning of Section 2 (c) of the Act of 1978, therefore, for the purpose of Chapter 7 of the act of 1973, they shall be deemed to be Registrar. 2 and 3, in charge principal Government Higher Secondary school Devrikala, District Katni has been nominated as the Education Officer. Thus, these Principals are the Education Officer within the meaning of Section 2 (c) of the Act of 1978, therefore, for the purpose of Chapter 7 of the act of 1973, they shall be deemed to be Registrar. ( 12 ) EVEN otherwise under Section 32 of the Act of 1973, the Registrar can (either by himself or by a person authorised by him)hold an enquiry into the constitution, working and financial condition of the society and on the basis of such enquiry or otherwise, if the Government is of the opinion that Governing body of any society is not functioning properly, State Government may by order in writing remove the governing body. Thus, the power of superseding the governing body of state aided society lies with the Government and not with the Registrar. The order dated 24-1-2002 passed by the Education Officer katni, Annexure A-6 has the effect of superseding the governing body of appellants Nos. 1 to 3 as it appoints the Managing Committee constituted by Ramavtar Tiwari to manage affairs of the society, which power could have been exercised only by the State Government. Appellants Nos. 1 to 3 are independent societies. There is 110 dispute regarding the governing body of these appellant-societies. The dispute is only with regard to governing body of appellant society No. 4. ( 13 ) THE scheme of Act of 1973 reveals that the Registrar shall mean Education Officer only for the purpose of Chapter 7 and for other provisions of the Act, Registrar shall mean the Registrar of Societies appointed under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act of 1973. The order passed by the District education Officer is not under Chapter 7 of the Act of 1973. An appeal under Section 40 can lie only when order is made by the Registrar appointed under sub-section (1) of section 4, therefore, against the order of District Education officer dated 24-1-2002, annexure A-6, appeal does not lie. By any stretch of imagination the order of respondent No. 3, annexure A-6, cannot be said to be under Section 32 of the Act of 1973. By any stretch of imagination the order of respondent No. 3, annexure A-6, cannot be said to be under Section 32 of the Act of 1973. The enquiry under Section 32 can be held only on the application together with an affidavit in support of its contents by a majority of the members of the governing body of the society or by not less than 1 /3rd of the total number of the members of the society. Since there was no enquiry under Section 32 (1) or 32 (2), the Registrar could not have issued any direction to the society. Thus, the order annexure A-6 is without authority and jurisdiction. ( 14 ) TO appreciate the contention of Shri baghel learned senior counsel for respondent No. 4, we have perused the constitution of society No. 4 which reveals that patron members of society No. 4 shall be the patron members of the society Nos. 1 to 3. Honorary members of society Nos. 1 to 3 shall be those members who are recommended by shramdham Seva Sansthan for a specified period. Constitution also provides that only patron members can put their candidature for Presidentship. Thus, society No. 4 practically has a sort of dominance over society nos. 1 to 3, but it cannot be said that society nos. 1 to 3 are the creation of society No. 4. ( 15 ) THE constitution of society No. 4 nowhere contemplates that the appellant societies are the creation of the said Sansthan. The appellants are educational societies separately registered under the Act of 1973. Copies of the registration certificate are on record as Annexures P-2, P-3 and P-4 with the petition. Appellants Nos. 1 to 3 have separate registration numbers which are 4718, 22487 and 1505 respectively. It cannot be said that society Nos. 1 to 3 do not have separate entity. Society No. 4 may dominate in the working of appellants Nos. 1 to 3 but it cannot be said that appellants Nos. 1 to 3 are the creation of society No. 4. Appellant societies have their separate constitution duly ratified by the Registrar of Firms and societies. 1 to 3 do not have separate entity. Society No. 4 may dominate in the working of appellants Nos. 1 to 3 but it cannot be said that appellants Nos. 1 to 3 are the creation of society No. 4. Appellant societies have their separate constitution duly ratified by the Registrar of Firms and societies. The current lists of the office bearers of the managing Committee of the appellant societies dated 27-5-2000 for three years has been duly approved and registered with the Registrar, Firms and Societies and are on record as Annexures P-6, P-7 and P-8 with the writ petition. No dispute is pending with regard to the managing body of appellants. Dispute between Ramavatar Tiwari and govind Prasad Pandey referred in the State government order dated 8-8-2001 Annexure a-2 was in relation to the society No. 4 which has separate registration No. i. e. 1742. ( 16 ) IN Writ Petition No. 4076/2001 Registrar was directed to decide the dispute between Ramavtar Tiwari and Govind Prasad pandey. The appellant societies have no concern with that dispute. Therefore, the contention of Shri Baghel that societies Nos. 1 to 3 are the creation of society No. 4 and they do not have any independent entity cannot be accepted. ( 17 ) IN view of the above discussion, we find that the learned single Judge erred in dismissing the writ petition and in not holding that the order dated 24-1-2002 is without any authority and jurisdiction. ( 18 ) ACCORDINGLY this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 6-5-2002 is hereby set aside. Appellants Nos. 1 to 3 shall continue to manage the affairs of their respective schools. Appeal allowed. .