JUDGMENT Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J. By means of this petition, the petitioners have challenged the validity of an order dated 06.08.2013, passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Faizabad Division, Faizabad. The petitioners have also challenged consequential order/letter issued by the Deputy Registrar to the District Inspector of Schools, Amebedkar Nagar. The petitioners have also prayed that election proceedings dated 01.09.2013, which have been held pursuant to the impugned orders dated 06.08.2013 and 23.08.2013, be also quashed with consequential effects. 2. Heard Sri Manish Kumar, learned counsel for petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Sri Pt. S.Chandra, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.5 and 6. 3. A society in the name and style of Shri Adarsh Sanskrit Vidyalaya,Akbalpur Slarpur post Malipur, District Faizabad/Ambedkar Nagar was registered on 18.10.1967 at file No.I-17768 having registration certificate no.694/1967-68. The certificate of the society was renewed from time to time. However, dispute arose in the year 2009 when one Hriday Narayan Mishra submitted certain papers for renewal of the society which were objected to by the petitioner no.2-Ram Nath Mishra by filing complaints on 23.10.2009 and 26.10.2009. The matter was considered by the Deputy Registrar and on 13.07.2010 the complaints dated 23.10.2009 and 26.10.2009 made by Sri Ram Nath Mishra were rejected and stand taken by Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra was found to be correct. 4. The said order dated 13.07.2010 was challenged before this Court by filing Writ Petition No.5043 (M/S) of 2010. In the said petition the order dated 13.07.2010 was assailed primarily on the ground that Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra has succeeded on the basis of his wrong date of birth. The ground taken in the writ petition was that Income Tax Department in its documents showed the date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra as 06.07.1967, whereas in the High School Certificate his date of birth was recorded as 06.07.1958. 5. In sum and substance, the ground of challenge of the order dated 13.07.2010 in the aforesaid writ petition was that Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra could not have been inducted as a member of the society in the year 1967 as he was minor at that time. 5. In sum and substance, the ground of challenge of the order dated 13.07.2010 in the aforesaid writ petition was that Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra could not have been inducted as a member of the society in the year 1967 as he was minor at that time. This Court, while deciding the aforesaid writ petition by means of judgement and order dated 13.07.2010 observed that in order to determine the date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra, there are several documents which are contradictory to each other. In these circumstances, the Court found that a fact finding inquiry needs to be conducted to determine the actual date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra and thus, directed the authorities to conduct the said inquiry. It was further observed by the Court that the materials available on record show contradictory facts and thus, contradiction cannot be overlooked. In this background, it was also observed that if in the inquiry, the contentions of the petitioners of Writ Petition No.5043 (M/S) of 2010 are found to be correct, then Deputy Registrar shall again examine the matter. It was thus directed that after the inquiry to be conducted by the State authorities into the complaint regarding the date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra, the Deputy Registrar shall proceed to decide the issue afresh after notice to the parties concerned. 6. The primary submission of learned counsel for petitioners is that the entire proceeding at the instance of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra was forged, who committed forgery while effecting cutting in the papers of the society in connivance with the office of the Deputy Registrar. In the application dated 26.10.2009, the petitioner no.2 has also stated the said facts. Similarly, yet in another application dated 29.01.2010, which is contained as annexure no.12 to the writ petition, the petitioner no.2 has levelled allegations of forgery and fabrication of documents by Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra. 7. In the application dated 26.10.2009, the petitioner no.2 has also stated the said facts. Similarly, yet in another application dated 29.01.2010, which is contained as annexure no.12 to the writ petition, the petitioner no.2 has levelled allegations of forgery and fabrication of documents by Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra. 7. It has been submitted, thus, by learned counsel for petitioners that though on the basis of inquiry conducted in compliance of the order dated 13.03.2013 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.5043 (M/S) of 2013, it has been concluded that date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra was incorrect and he was found to be minor in the year 1976 when he is said to have been inducted in the society, however, the Deputy Registrar instead of cancelling the entire list has only deleted the name of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra and hence, the impugned order is not sustainable. 8. On the other hand, Pt. S. Chandra, learned counsel representing the respondent nos.5 and 6 has raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition and has further stated that the impugned order passed by the Deputy Registrar does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity so as to call for any interference by this Court. 9. It has been submitted by learned counsel representing the respondent nos.3 and 4 that the petitioner no.2 is not the elected Manager of the Committee of Management and he could not have filed the instant petition representing the Committee of Management. He has further stated that in his individual capacity also the petitioner no.2 cannot file this petition in view of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Umesh Chandra and another vs. Mahila Vidyalaya Society,Aminabad, Lucknow and others, reported in 2006 (24) LCD 1373 . He has also submitted that it is well settled principle that in writ jurisdiction the dispute regarding electoral rolls or outcome of election cannot be interfered with. In support of his argument, he relied upon various judgments including the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Vijay Tiwari vs. State of U.P. And others, reported in 2015 (33) LCD 2143 . 10. Dealing with the preliminary objection, this Court observes that as to whether the petitioner no.2 is the validly elected Manager or not to be able to file this petition is not relevant here. 10. Dealing with the preliminary objection, this Court observes that as to whether the petitioner no.2 is the validly elected Manager or not to be able to file this petition is not relevant here. The impugned order has been passed by the Deputy Registrar dated 06.08.2013 in compliance of the judgment and order dated 13.03.2013 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 5043 (M/S) of 2010 whereby it is not only that the dispute relating to date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra and his induction as a member of the society was directed to be decided but also that the Deputy Registrar was directed to decide the issue afresh. The said direction by this Court was issued in the background of the fact that the order dated 13.07.2010 was challenged in the writ petition whereby complaints of petitioner no.2 regarding forged induction as a member of the society by committing fraud and manipulation and fabrication of the documents were rejected. The Court found prima facie substance in the said complaints made by petitioner no.2 and accordingly directed that inquiry to be conducted by the officials of the State Government for determining the date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra and thereafter directed the Deputy Registrar to decide the issue afresh. The Deputy Registrar while passing the impugned order, except for holding that the date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra has wrongly been recorded and that he could not have been inducted as a member of the society, being minor, has not considered the complaints of Ram Nath Mishra relating to forgery, concoction and fabrication of documents whereby Sri Hridya Nath Mishra is said to have fabricated the documents in the office of the Deputy Registrar. Thus, looking into the issue involved in this matter, first objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition is not sustainable and is thus over ruled. 11. The other ground taken by Pt. Thus, looking into the issue involved in this matter, first objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition is not sustainable and is thus over ruled. 11. The other ground taken by Pt. S. Chandra, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.5 and 6 in respect of maintainability of the writ petition that ordinarily the writ court should not interfere in the matters concerning electoral rolls or outcome of the election, I may only observe that since the election dated 01.09.2013 is based on the impugned orders dated 06.08.2013 and 23.08.2013, as such in case the impugned orders are set-aside, the consequence would be that the alleged election dated 01.09.2013 would also be quashed. For making any observation on the election proceedings dated 01.09.2013 in these proceedings, the Court need not go into the correctness of the electoral rolls or even of the election proceedings. Thus, in this view, second ground taken by learned counsel for respondent nos.5 and 6 regarding maintainability of the petition also merits rejection which is hereby rejected. 12. Now coming to the submissions made by learned counsel for respective parties, what is noticeable is that in the inquiry conducted in compliance of the order dated 13.03.2013 passed by this Court, it was found that the date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra was forged. The Deputy Registrar while passing the impugned order has also accepted the finding in respect of date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra and has held that in the year 1976, when he is said to have been inducted as a member of the society, he was minor and as such has cancelled his membership. However, the Deputy Registrar appears to have misdirected himself while considering the pleas raised by respondent no.5-Maan Singh. 13. From perusal of the documents available on record, it appears that Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra very reluctantly participated in the proceedings before the Deputy Registrar perhaps knowing fully well that he has forged his date of birth for the purpose of his induction as a member of the society. At this juncture, it appears that on 19.06.2013 respondent no.5-Maan Singh moved some application/letter seeking his impleadment. On the said application, the petitioner no.2-Ram Nath Mishra filed his objections on 22.06.2013. At this juncture, it appears that on 19.06.2013 respondent no.5-Maan Singh moved some application/letter seeking his impleadment. On the said application, the petitioner no.2-Ram Nath Mishra filed his objections on 22.06.2013. The Deputy Registrar did not decide the core issue relating to concoction and forgery in the documents in terms of the complaints dated 26.11.2009 (annexure no.10 to the writ petition) and 29.01.2010 (annexure no.12 to the writ petition). While passing the impugned order, he has also stated that the respondent no.5 was not a party to Writ Petition No.5043 (M/S) of 2010 and he is the President of the Committee of Management as alleged by Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra as such he did not consider the issue and rejected the application made by Sri Maan Singh. By the impugned order instead of enquiring into the allegations of forgery, the Deputy Registrar has only removed the name of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra and issued the list of members of the general body. 14. As observed above, this Court while passing the order dated 13.03.2013 in Writ Petition No. 5043 (M/S) of 2010 had directed an inquiry not only into the issue relating to date of birth of Sri Hriday Narayan Mishra but had also directed the Deputy Registrar to decide the issue afresh. The issue raised before the Deputy Registrar was in relation to the complaints made by petitioner no.2 which were rejected earlier by means of his order dated 13.07.2010. 15. In view of the aforesaid discussions, I am of the considered opinion that the Deputy Registrar while passing the impugned order dated 06.08.2013 has not taken into account the issue raised especially the complaints made by petitioner no.2 and has also not followed the judgement and order dated 13.03.2013 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.5043 (M/S) of 2010. 16. In the result, the writ petition deserves to be allowed. 17. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the order dated 06.08.2013 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Faizabad Division, Faizabad, as contained in annexure no.2 to the writ petition and the consequential letter dated 23.08.2013 written by the Deputy Registrar to the District Inspector of Schools, Ambedkar Nagar are hereby quashed. 18. The election proceedings dated 01.09.2013, which are consequential to the orders dated 06.08.2013 and 23.08.2013, are also quashed. 18. The election proceedings dated 01.09.2013, which are consequential to the orders dated 06.08.2013 and 23.08.2013, are also quashed. The Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Faizabad Division, Faizabad is directed to reconsider the entire matter in light of the observations made hereinabove and take final decision expeditiously, say, within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 19. It is worthwhile to mention that this Court while deciding the matter earlier by means of its judgement and order dated 13.03.2013 had directed that till a fresh decision is taken by the Deputy Registrar, the Principal of the Government Inter College shall control the managing affairs of the Society. Accordingly, it is provided that till the decision by the Deputy Registrar is taken under this order being passed today, the affairs of the society/college shall be managed/controlled and supervised by the Principal of any Government Inter College, Ambedkar Nagar to be nominated by the District Inspector of Schools concerned. 20. There will be no order as to costs.