JUDGMENT Karunesh Singh Pawar, J. Heard Ms. Bulbul Godiyal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri. Ram Raj Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional CSC for respondent no. 1 to 3 as well as Shri. M.B. Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 4. 2. A preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the petition has been raised by learned counsel for respondent no. 4 submitting that the impugned order has been passed at the instance of 71 members of the society who have filed the reference, copy of which is on record, however, out of 71 members, only one person has been impleaded as private respondent i.e. respondent no. 4 and the others have not been impleaded, hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of the necessary parties. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute this fact that other seventy members have not been impleaded, although it has been submitted that respondent no. 4 is the main contesting respondent which has been denied by the learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4. 4. In view of the disputed facts that other seventy persons who moved the reference before the SDM under Section 25(1) of the Society Registration Act, 1860 and at their instance, the impugned order has been passed appear to be the affected parties and they have not been impleaded by the petitioner, hence, the petition is dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties.