JUDGMENT Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. The petitioner, who claims to be the committee of management of Shri Ram Janki Sanskrit Vidya Mandir, Padrauna, Madrahi, Dudhi, Kushinagar, has approached this Court questioning the legality of order dated 30.3.2016 passed by Assistant Registrar, Gorakhpur, whereby a direction has been issued for undertaking proceedings for renewal of the registration of the society on the basis of documents submitted by the sixth respondent. Apart from the said direction, in the last part of the order, a further direction has been given for undertaking proceedings under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act after obtaining documents from the sixth respondent. 2. Shri Ram Janki Sanskrit Vidya Mandir, Padrauna, Madrahi, Dudhi, Kushinagar is a registered society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. According to the petitioner, it is the validly elected committee in control of the affairs of the society. It is exercising all administrative powers except the financial powers, which are being exercised by the respondents no.3 and 4. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order in so far as it directs for obtaining papers from the sixth respondent for undertaking exercise under Section 4 of the Act, is wholly illegal, inasmuch as the petitioner is the validly elected committee. He further submitted that even the direction for granting renewal on the basis of documents submitted by the sixth respondent is wholly illegal. 3. In the impugned order, it has been noted that in the past a similar representation filed by the petitioner on 21.5.2002 was rejected having been found to be wholly frivolous. The said order was not challenged before any court of law and had attained finality. The renewal of the registration of the society is for the benefit of the society and it is now well settled that even a defacto committee can apply for renewal. In the opinion of the Court, the mere fact that a renewal has been directed on the basis of the documents submitted by the sixth respondent, will in no manner prejudice the petitioner, as such, no ground is made out to interfere with the said part of the order. 4. In the opinion of the Court, the mere fact that a renewal has been directed on the basis of the documents submitted by the sixth respondent, will in no manner prejudice the petitioner, as such, no ground is made out to interfere with the said part of the order. 4. Sri R.C. Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the sixth respondent submitted that the sixth respondent was elected in an election held in the year 2014 and all documents were duly submitted in the office of the Assistant Registrar for purposes of registration of the list of office bearers under Section 4 of the Act. However, he does not dispute that so far the list has not been registered. 5. The Assistant Registrar, therefore, before proceeding to register the list of office bearers is required to follow the provisions of Section 4 of the Act, which itself contemplates an inquiry in case the situation so warrants. Accordingly, it is clarified that in case any objection is filed by the petitioner before the Assistant Registrar setting up its own claim and disputing the claim of the sixth respondent, it goes without saying that the Assistant Registrar shall abide by the provisions of law, before proceeding to register the list of office bearers. With the aforesaid clarification, the writ petition stands disposed of.