Devendra Pratap Singh, J.;- Heard learned counsel for the parties. With regard to an election of a society which runs an intermediate college both the parties were before this Court in Writ Petition No. 30913 of 2011. The aforesaid writ petition filed by the petitioner was allowed by the following order dated 25.5.2011: "Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Shiva Vidyalaya Samiti Kataur (Etah) in Kashi Ram Nagar is a duly registered Society which has established and runs an Intermediate College by the name "Shiva Inter College", but is aided only uptill High School level. An Authorised Controller was working in the institution since 1999 and for various reasons, he could not hold the elections mainly due to finalisation of the electoral college. It appears that the petitioners earlier approached this Court through Writ Petition No.63408 of 2010 and obtained an order dated 22.10.2010 directing the Joint Director to hold the elections. It appears that the electoral roll was finalised, but the name of the petitioners was excluded, thus, he preferred Writ Petition No.5396 of 2011, but in the mean time the elections had been held on 27.1.2011 and as such a learned Single Judge of this Court relegated both the parties to the Regional Level Committee with a direction that the objections of the petitioners in regard to order of the Authorised Controller dated 15.1.2011 may also be considered and it was kept open to the parties to file their objections. In pursuance thereof, the petitioners filed fresh detailed objections, especially with regard to validity of the electoral college including the legality of the membership of the contesting respondent. Thereafter the present impugned order has been passed holding that the elections of the contesting respondent were legally held. Apart from raising several arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that none of the objections raised by the petitioners including in regard to electoral college and the legality of the membership of the contesting respondent has been considered and the order has been passed in a cursory manner. Prima facie, the Regional Committee, after noticing sketchy facts, has passed the order without addressing the specific objections raised on behalf of the petitioners. Prima facie, the Regional Committee, after noticing sketchy facts, has passed the order without addressing the specific objections raised on behalf of the petitioners. At this stage, learned counsel for the contesting respondent states that he does not wish to file any counter affidavit and the matter may be remitted to the Regional Committee to decide the dispute afresh. Accordingly, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed and the order dated 28.4.2011 is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted to the Regional Committee which will decide it afresh after considering the objections of the parties by a reasoned order within a period of six weeks from the date of submission of a certified copy of the order." Now this petition has been filed alleging that the Joint Director of Education has taken money from the contesting respondent for deciding in his favour. It is also stated that when the petitioner met the Joint Director of Education, he asked the petitioner to arrange for money. From the order of this Court which is quoted above, it is evident that the matter has to be decided by three member Regional Committee and not by the Joint Director of Education. At present the Court is not inclined to enter into the factual aspect as to whether the allegations made by the petitioner are correct and he should await the decision. In view of the aforesaid, no case for interference is made out at this stage. Rejected.