Judgment Alok Singh, J. Present petition is filed assailing the order dated 19.08.2014, passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms Societies and Chits, Haridwar whereby learned Deputy Registrar was pleased to make reference to the Prescribed Authority under Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 as applicable within the State of U.P and Uttarakhand. This Court, vide judgment dated 23rd April, 2014, passed in Writ Petition No. 888 of 2014 (M/S), Shiftain Ali Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others declined to entertain Writ Petition No. 888 of 2014 (M/S), however, liberty was granted to the petitioner either to file Civil Suit or to approach the Prescribed Authority under Section 25 of the Act. 2. Learned Deputy Registrar, in view of the judgment passed by this Court dated 23rd April, 2014, was pleased to make reference to the Prescribed Authority. Feeling aggrieved, present petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while placing reliance upon the judgment of the learned Single Judge of Allahabad High Court in the case of Prabhat Misra and others Vs. Jai Shankar Tripathi and others, reported in 1978 All.L.J. 672, has vehemently argued that learned Deputy Registrar cannot be persuaded by any individual to make reference under Section 25 of the Act. Therefore, reference made by the Deputy Registrar is bad in law. 4. Section 25 of the Act reads as under :- “25. Disputes regarding election of office-bearers. Jai Shankar Tripathi and others, reported in 1978 All.L.J. 672, has vehemently argued that learned Deputy Registrar cannot be persuaded by any individual to make reference under Section 25 of the Act. Therefore, reference made by the Deputy Registrar is bad in law. 4. Section 25 of the 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 at least 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: [Provided that the election of an office-bearer shall be set aside where the prescribed authority is satisfied – (a) that any corrupt practice has been committed by such office-bearer; or (b) that the nomination of any candidate has been improperly rejected; or (c) that the result of the election in so far it concerns such office-bearer has been materially affected by the improper acceptance of any nomination or by the improper reception, refusal or rejection of any vote or the reception of any vote which is void or by any non-compliance with the provisions of any rules of the society. Explanation I. – A person shall be deemed to have committed a corrupt practice who, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person – (i) induces, or attempts to induce, by fraud, intentional misrepresentation, coercion or threat of injury, any elector to give or to refrain from giving a vote in favour of any candidate, or any person to stand or not to stand as, or to withdraw or not to withdraw from being a candidate at the election; (ii) with a view to inducing any elector to give or to refrain from giving a vote in favour of any candidate, or to inducing any person to stand or not to stand as, or to withdraw or not to withdraw from being, a candidate at the election, offers or gives any money, or valuable consideration, or any place of employment, or holds out any promise of individual advantage or profit to any person; (iii) abets (within the meaning of the Indian Penal Code) the doing of any of the acts specified in clauses (i) and (ii); (iv) induces or attempts to induce a candidate or elector to believe that he, or any person in whom he is interested, will become or will be rendered an object of divine displeasure or spiritual censure; (v) canvasses on grounds of caste, community, sect or religion; (vi) commits such other practice as the State Government may prescribe to be a corrupt practice. Explanation II. – A ‘promise of individual advantage or profit to a person’ includes a promise for the benefit of the person himself, or of any one in whom he is interested. Explanation III. Explanation II. – A ‘promise of individual advantage or profit to a person’ includes a promise for the benefit of the person himself, or of any one in whom he is interested. Explanation III. – The State Government may prescribe the procedure for hearing and decision of doubts or disputes in respect of such elections and make provision in respect of any other matter relating to such elections for which insufficient provision exists in this Act or in the rules of the society.] (2) Where by an order made under sub-section (1), an election is set aside or an office-bearer is held no longer entitled to continue in office or where the Registrar is satisfied that any election of office-bearers of a society has not been held within the time specified in the rules of that society, he may call meeting of the general body of such society for electing such office-bearer or office-bearers, and such meeting shall be presided over and be conducted by the Registrar or by any officer authorized by him in this behalf, and the provisions in the rules of the society relating to meetings and elections shall apply to such meeting and election with necessary modifications. (3) Where a meeting is called by the Registrar under sub-section (2), no other meeting shall be called for the purpose of election by any other authority or by any person claiming to be an office-bearer of the society. Explanation. – For the purposes of this section, the expression ‘prescribed authority, means an officer or court authorized in this behalf by the State Government by notification published in the Official Gazette.” 5. Reference can be made under Section 25 of the Act to the Prescribed Authority either by the Registrar or by ¼ of the members of the Society registered under the Act. In my humble opinion, Registrar may decide to make reference after collecting the desired information either su moto or on the basis of the information supplied by someone. Therefore, in my humble opinion, any member of the Society may supply information to the Registrar by way of an application persuading him to make reference. 6. Section 25 of the Act does not contemplate that Registrar cannot be approached by any individual of the Society. Therefore, in my humble opinion, any member of the Society may supply information to the Registrar by way of an application persuading him to make reference. 6. Section 25 of the Act does not contemplate that Registrar cannot be approached by any individual of the Society. Therefore, I am really unable to agree with the view of the learned Single Judge of Allahabad High Court in the case of Prabhat Misra (Supra). In my considered opinion, judgment of learned Single Judge in the case of Prabhat Misra (Supra) is per incuriam being not consistent with the mandate of Section 25 of the Act. No other ground is pressed. 7. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. 8. CLMA No. 10218 of 2014 also stands disposed of accordingly.