Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J. Sri Ajay Kumar Chaudhary has put in appearance through a Caveator, who has been heard under Chapter XXII Rule 5-A of Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, who has come up questioning the order passed by the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies & Chits, dated 15.9.2012 on the ground that the election of the Society had already been held through the Basic Education Officer and, therefore, the exercise of powers by the respondent No.3 under Sub-Section ( 2) of Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act is absolutely unwarranted. It is undisputed that the elections relate to the Management of a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, which runs a Junior High School. There is no other separate Scheme of Administration. In the opinion of the Court, there is no power with the Basic Education Officer to hold the elections of a Society under the 1860 Act or initiate any such process of election. The Assistant Registrar was informed that no elections had been held for the past 10 years which fact is undisputed. In the absence of any such intervening event, the Assistant Registrar was, therefore, justified in invoking his powers under Sub-section ( 2) of Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The elections held by the Basic Education Officer were, therefore, without authority in law. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment in the case of Committee of Management, Vidyawati Higher Secondary School Shahpur, Sarain, Azamgarh and others Vs. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies & Chits, Azamgarh, and others, 2005 ( 1) AWC 927 , to contend that the Assistant Registrar will not have the authority to convene any other meeting in view of the aforesaid decision and, therefore, the annulment of the earlier election held by the Basic Education Officer is unjustified. Having perused the said judgment, the facts of the present case do not in any way attract the ratio of the aforesaid decision inasmuch as in the instant case the order passed by the Assistant Registrar is of a very recent origin that is on 15.9.2012. The Assistant Registrar now has to convene the meeting for holding of the election. In that case, the Assistant Registrar had already passed the order but no meeting had been convened by him. The Assistant Registrar now has to convene the meeting for holding of the election. In that case, the Assistant Registrar had already passed the order but no meeting had been convened by him. It is in the said circumstances, that the General Body had convened the meeting and such meeting was upheld by the Court. In the instant case, such a situation has not yet arrived and, therefore, the ratio of the said decision does not apply in the present controversy at all. The election having not been held after expiry of the earlier term of the Committee, it is only the Assistant Registrar who can hold the elections under Sub-section ( 2) of Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The impugned order, therefore, does not suffer from any infirmity. No other point has been raised before this Court. Accordingly, this writ petition has no merit and is dismissed.