JUDGMENT Rajan Roy, J. – Heard Sri S.K. Kalia, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Ramesh Pandey, and Dileep Kumar Mishra, on behalf of the petitioner and Dr. L.P. Mishra assisted by Sri Alok Kumar Misra on behalf of opposite party no. 5, and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for opposite parties nos. 1 to 4 and 7. Notice need not be issue to opposite party no. 6. 2. Challenge herein is to the order dated 11.02.2015 passed by the Deputy Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits, Faizabad accepting the list of 165 members of general body of the society alleged to be submitted by the President of the society, petitioner no. 2 herein. The other order under challenge is the order dated 13.08.2015 passed by the Deputy Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits, Lucknow in the proceedings initiated on the list of members of general body submitted by petitioners on 12.03.2015 and the notice issued on 16.03.2015. 3. The dispute herein is with regard to two lists of the general body; one submitted in the year 2014 allegedly by the President of the society, who is petitioner no.2 herein, comprising 165 members and the other submitted by the petitioners, including petitioner no. 2 on 12.03.2015, comprising 50 members. 4. The society in question has been registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860 since 1964 and is running a Post Graduate College. Indisputably the last undisputed elections of the society in question were held in the year 2010. At the relevant time the members of the general body were only 41. In the said elections of the committee of management indisputably Sri Y.N. Srivastava and Sri R. K. Tripathi were elected as President and Manager of the society but the said two persons died in the year 2010 and 2011. Consequently the vacancies were filled up by appointment of petitioners nos. 2 and 3 which fact is not denied by opposite party no. 5 nor by the Deputy Registrar. 5. The tenure of the said committee of management was to end on 29.03.2015. In the meantime a list of 101 members of general body was submitted before the Deputy Registrar, Faizabad on 07.06.2014 allegedly under the signature of petitioner no. 2. Thereafter another list of 155 members of general body was submitted on 08.08.2014 again with a covering letter allegedly under the signature of petitioner no. 2. In the meantime a list of 101 members of general body was submitted before the Deputy Registrar, Faizabad on 07.06.2014 allegedly under the signature of petitioner no. 2. Thereafter another list of 155 members of general body was submitted on 08.08.2014 again with a covering letter allegedly under the signature of petitioner no. 2. Ultimately a third list is said to have been submitted on 12.10.2014 comprising 165 members of the general body also allegedly under the signature of petitioner no. 2. It is this 3rd list which was accepted by the Deputy Registrar Faizabad by the impugned order dated 11.02.2015. 6. However, in the interregnum before accepting the said list the Deputy Registrar issued a notice on 20.12.2014 asking the President of the society to submit original documents and get the list of 165 members of general body allegedly submitted by him, published in any one of the daily newspapers like Dainik Jagaran/Hindustan/Aaj so that any body having objection may submit the same within 15 days from the date of publication. It is not disputed that the said list of 165 members of the general body was got published in a local newspaper, namely Maurya Samrat. According to the petitioner it is not a recognised newspaper. Be that as it may, it was not published in any of the newspapers as suggested by the Deputy Registrar in his letter dated 20.12.2014 or any other newspaper of equal reputation. Nevertheless in absence of objections the aforesaid list was accepted by the Deputy Registrar Faizabad vide order dated 11.02.2015. Subsequently on 12.03.2015 the petitioners herein submitted a list of 50 members of the general body whereupon the Deputy Registrar Faizabad issued a notice on 16.03.2015 apprising that the President of the Society had already submitted a list of 165 members of the general body and expressing surprise over submission of a different list subsequently. It is on this notice that the proceedings took place thereafter and the matter was transferred from the office of Deputy Registrar, Faizabad to Deputy Registrar, Lucknow by the Registrar on an application submitted by opposite party no. 5 and others. 7. It is on this notice that the proceedings took place thereafter and the matter was transferred from the office of Deputy Registrar, Faizabad to Deputy Registrar, Lucknow by the Registrar on an application submitted by opposite party no. 5 and others. 7. Be that as it may, the Deputy Registrar Lucknow held the proceedings and by means of the impugned order dated 13.08.2015 he has declined the claim of the petitioners herein based on the list of 50 members of the general body submitted on 12.03.2015 as also declined to recall the order of Deputy Registrar Faizabad dated 11.02.2015. He has gone on to hold that the elections held by both the contesting parties in March, 2015 are invalid on the ground that the said election proceedings were held during pendency of the aforesaid dispute of the membership of the general body before the Deputy Registrar. Based thereon he proceeded to declare the committee of management of the society time barred under Section 25(2) of the Act 1860 and ordered for holding the elections by issuing an election schedule. 8. After arguing the matter at length a consensus has been arrived at by the parties that necessary ingredients as contained in Section 4-B of the Act 1860 were not complied with either by the Deputy Registrar, Faizabad while passing the order dated 11.02.2015 or by the Deputy Registrar, Lucknow while passing the order dated 13.08.2015. The Court is of the considered view that the orders passed by the Deputy Registrars herein above do not conform to the statutory requirement as mentioned herein above. The earlier order dated 11.02.2015 passed by the Deputy Registrar Faizabad is also not sustainable for the reason that publication of the list of 165 members of general body was not done as per the intent of the Deputy Registrar, Faizabad contained in his letter dated 20.12.2014. 9. In these circumstances no further discussion on the controversy in question is required. Suffice it to say that both the impugned orders, dated 11.02.2015 and 13.08.2015 passed by the Deputy Registrar Faizabad and Deputy Registrar Lucknow respectively cannot be sustained and the same are accordingly quashed. 10. 9. In these circumstances no further discussion on the controversy in question is required. Suffice it to say that both the impugned orders, dated 11.02.2015 and 13.08.2015 passed by the Deputy Registrar Faizabad and Deputy Registrar Lucknow respectively cannot be sustained and the same are accordingly quashed. 10. Considering the contentious nature of the dispute the Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits is directed to nominate a Deputy Registrar other than the Deputy Registrar Faizabad, Deputy Registrar Lucknow and Deputy Registrar, Lucknow Head Quarters, to hear the dispute relating to members of general body of the society in question within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The Deputy Registrar so nominated by the Registrar shall proceed in accordance with Section 4-B read with Section 15 of the Act 1860 after taking into consideration the original records to be provided by the respective parties, within a period of two months from the date of his nomination. Needless to say that he will give due notice to the parties before deciding the dispute. Consequences to follow as per law. 11. With the aforesaid directions the writ petition is disposed of.