JUDGMENT Arun Tandon, J.—Heard Sri W. H. Khan on behalf of the petitioner and standing counsel on behalf of respondent No. 1. It is not necessary to issue notice to respondent No. 2 in view of the order proposed to be passed today in the present writ petition. 2. The petitioner-Committee of Management Madarsa Qamrul Uloom Islamiya Samiti, Kakrala, Budaun, through its Manger Sri Rafi Ahmad Khan, has filed this writ petition, amongst others, for the relief that the objection filed by the petitioner on 31.7.2004 and the representation dated 9.8.2004 may be considered and decided by the Assistant Registrar in accordance with law. 3. According to the petitioner the elections of the Committee of Management of the society registered in the name of Madarsa Qamrul Uloom Islamiya, Kakrala, Budaun, were held on 10.9.2001 and in pursuance of the elections so held a list of office bearers was duly registered by the Assistant Registrar under Section 4 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 5.10.2001. All of a sudden the Assistant Registrar has registered another list of office bearers of the Committee of Management of the society submitted by Sri Zeeshan Khan, respondent No. 2 on 6.7.2004 on the basis of alleged elections said to have taken place on 10.5.2002. According to the petitioner under the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act it is mandatory that for registering the list of newly elected office bearers the same should be countersigned by the outgoing office bearers of the Committee of Management and in case they do not countersign the same the Registrar should issue public notice inviting objections against the list which has been submitted for registration and thereafter pass orders with respect thereto after deciding the objections, if any. The relevant proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act reads as under : Provided that if the managing body is elected after the last submission of the list, the counter-signatures of the old members, shall, as far as possible, be obtained on the list, if the old office bearers do not countersign the list, the Registrar may, in his discretion, issue a public notice or notices to such persons as he thinks fit inviting objections within a specified period and shall decide all objections received within the said period.” 4. In view of the aforesaid provision it is contended that it was mandatory for the Assistant Registrar to have asked for the counter-signatures of the outgoing office bearers of the Committee of Management. Neither the list of alleged newly elected office bearers has been countersigned nor public notice in respect of the same has been issued and therefore, an application has been filed by the petitioner for recall of the order dated 6.7.2004 passed by the Assistant Registrar registering the aforesaid list submitted by respondent No. 2. The application so filed by the petitioner has yet not been processed, hence the present writ petition. 5. Without entering into the controversy raised in the present writ petition, since the application of the petitioner dated 31.7.2004 followed by representation dated 9.8.2004, contained in Annexures-9 and 11 to the writ petition, for recall of the order dated 6.7.2004, which according to the petitioner has been obtained without compliance of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act, is still pending before the Assistant Registrar, it is provided that the Assistant Registrar shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties, at the earliest possible, preferably within one month from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before him. 6. With the aforesaid direction the writ petition is disposed of finally.